The Pilgrims’ Progress – Honoring Our Forefathers on the 400th Anniversary of the First (and Most Expensive) Thanksgiving

pilgrims-plymouth-getty
Hulton Archive/Getty Images

REBECCA MANSOUR 25 Nov 2021

This year marks the 400th anniversary of the first Thanksgiving celebrated by our Pilgrim fathers and mothers in 1621.

If this fact is news to you, I’m not surprised. After all, there was very little fanfare last year to celebrate the 400th anniversary of the Pilgrims’ arrival at Plymouth, Massachusetts, in 1620, an event which President John Quincy Adams described as the “birthday” of our nation. But that seminal moment in world history passed with barely a mention.

This year, you’ll see more about the inflated price of Thanksgiving dinner than about the 400th anniversary of the holiday. And while it’s true that Bidenflation has made this year’s turkey feast the most expensive in living memory, no one who knows the true history of the first Thanksgiving can ever doubt that the Pilgrims paid a greater price for their meal than anything we ever will.

But you would have to know their story to understand that. And these days, the Pilgrims are being airbrushed out of our cultural memory.

The Pilgrims’ Progress from Heroes to Villains

The same wokesters who are busy removing Thomas Jefferson’s statue from New York City Hall have unfairly maligned our Pilgrim fathers and reframed the history of the nation they founded.

“There appear to be few commemorations, parades, or festivals to celebrate the Pilgrims this year, perhaps in part because revisionist charlatans of the radical left have lately claimed the previous year as America’s true founding,” Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) said last year.

The “revisionist charlatans” he was referring to are the authors of the New York Times’  “1619 Project,” which commemorates the year that the first ship arrived in the Virginia colony carrying African slaves. Recognizing the significance of the 400th anniversary of the beginning of American slavery is certainly worthwhile, but the 1619 Project’s authors went beyond recognition and sought to “reframe” all of American history around the events of 1619. For this, they have been roundly criticized by historians who decry their many inaccuracies and revisionist interpretations (including, for example, their claim that the American Revolution was fought in order to preserve slavery in the colonies).

Most of the criticism has focused on the Project’s controversial claim (which was later scrubbed from the New York Times’ website) that 1619 is the year of “our true founding,” not 1620 when the Pilgrims landed at Plymouth and planted the seed of our democracy that ripened in 1776.

In a Times op-ed rebutting the critics, Nicholas Guyatt argues that “the 1619 Project radically challenges a core narrative of American history” by refuting the notion that “the story of the United States [is] a gradual unfolding of freedom.” Instead, the Project’s authors “describe a nation in which racism is persistent and protean. White supremacy shapeshifts through the nation’s history, finding new forms to continue the work of subjugation and exclusion.”

In other words, they think Abraham Lincoln got it wrong when he said our nation was “conceived in Liberty.” They think it was conceived in racism.

The new book by New York Times journalist Nikole Hannah-Jones, “The 1619 Project: A New Origin Story” is displayed at a New York City bookstore on November 17, 2021. (Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

And with the push to incorporate the 1619 Project and Critical Race Theory into school curriculums, these woke revisionists are hard at work rewriting our history one school kid at a time, just as they’ve been busy for years “reframing” the history of the Pilgrims and Thanksgiving.

Ann Coulter gave an excellent summary of the woke interpretation of Thanksgiving: “As every contemporary school child knows, our Pilgrim forefathers took a break from slaughtering Indigenous Peoples to invite them to dinner and infect them with smallpox, before embarking on their mission to fry the planet.”

She’s not joking. America’s teachers have “begun a slow, complex process of ‘unlearning’ the widely accepted American narrative of Thanksgiving,” according to Education Week. To unlearn the “myth” of Thanksgiving, educators are seeking ways “to help students appreciate colonial oppression of Natives and the violence that ensued from it.” The article helpfully includes a video of PBS NewsHours’ Judy Woodruff explaining that the “quintessential feel-good holiday” of Thanksgiving actually “perpetuates a myth and dishonors Native Americans.”

The story of Thanksgiving fares even worse on college campuses, where students are taught that it should be commemorated as a “National Day of Mourning,” not a day off for food, family, and football.

“It’s kind of just based off the genocide of the indigenous people,” one student at Minnesota’s Macalester College told the College Fix. “The history of the holiday is obviously not the best. It’s very violent and oppressive,” said another.

That is malicious and historically inaccurate garbage! It’s a flat out lie.

We know who the Pilgrims are and what they did because they meticulously documented their history for posterity.

Our Founding Myth

Our knowledge of the Pilgrims comes from two primary sources. The earliest account is from Edward Winslow, whose report on the founding of the Plymouth settlement was published in London in 1622, just two years after the Pilgrims arrived in the New World. The more detailed and authoritative account comes from the Pilgrims’ second governor, William Bradford, whose poignant and eloquent history Of Plymouth Plantation, written between 1630 and 1651, tells the story of the community from their formation in England to their exile in Holland and their eventual founding of the Plymouth Colony.

Any fair reading of the primary source documentation will give you all the evidence you need to understand why we chose the Pilgrims’ arrival at Plymouth as the date of “our true founding” and as the basis of our founding myth.

But before I examine that record, let me make clear what I mean by the term “founding myth.” To call an event a founding myth is not to denigrate it or to question its historical accuracy. The fact that Americans don’t understand this is an indictment of our education system, which no longer teaches the Classics (‘cuz learning Greek and Latin is apparently “racist” or something).

Our nation’s Founders understood the concept of a founding (or origin) myth in the same way the ancient Greeks and Romans did. A nation’s origin myth isn’t a falsification of history meant to deceive. Quite the contrary! It is a story rooted in history that reflects a nation’s most sacred values, rituals, and identity. To call something your founding myth is to state: This is who we were, this is who we are, and this is who we aspire to be.

An origin myth often describes the emergence of a new civilization out of the ashes of an older one.

Take, for example, the Aeneid, Virgil’s epic poem recounting the founding myth of ancient Rome. In one of the most memorable passages, Virgil provided us with a perfect reflection of the Roman concept of pietas, which means a religious and familial duty. Virgil described his hero, Aeneas, fleeing the burning city of Troy while holding the hand of his young son and carrying on his back his elderly father who is cradling in his arms their family’s household gods. In that beautiful tableau, Aeneas reflects all the values the Romans held most sacred: He is protecting his family and honoring his gods, as he flees the fall of one civilization and courageously sets out to found another, greater one in Rome.

Aeneas flees burning Troy, painting by Federico Barocci (Galleria Borghese, Rome, Italy)

There is a reason why we chose the Pilgrims and their establishment of the Plymouth Colony in 1620 as our origin myth, not the Virginians who settled in Jamestown over a decade before that date. Our reasoning had everything to do with the Pilgrims’ lack of racism. Americans have always aspired to be on the right side of history, and the Pilgrims were nothing if not righteous.

Their story embodies our most sacred American values. Like Aeneas fleeing the fall of Troy, the Pilgrims saw themselves as fleeing a cataclysmic conflagration about to engulf Europe. And like the Roman hero, they too hoped to forge a new civilization with a spark from the dying embers of the old one.

This is exactly how John Quincy Adams viewed the story of the Pilgrims. In a speech in 1802 commemorating the landing at Plymouth, Adams described the Pilgrims as America’s origin myth; but unlike other nations, the heroes of our founding myth were clearly known to us by their historical record, and they were defined by their virtue, not by their conquest.

“In reverting to the period of [their] origin, other nations have generally been compelled to plunge into the chaos of impenetrable antiquity, or to trace a lawless ancestry into the caverns of ravishers and robbers,” Adams told his American audience. “It is your peculiar privilege to commemorate, in this birthday of your nation, an event ascertained in its minutest details; an event of which the principal actors are known to you familiarly, as if belonging to your own age; an event of a magnitude before which imagination shrinks at the imperfection of her powers. It is your further happiness to behold, in those eminent characters, who were most conspicuous in accomplishing the settlement of your country, men upon whose virtue you can dwell with honest exultation.”

What’s more, Adams explained that the Pilgrims were the antithesis of cruel or racist conquers seeking to vanquish and plunder. Instead, they “were illustrious by their intrepid valor no less than by their Christian graces … Their glory has not been wafted over oceans of blood to the remotest regions of the earth. They have not erected to themselves colossal statues upon pedestals of human bones, to provoke and insult the tardy hand of heavenly retribution. But theirs was ‘the better fortitude of patience and heroic martyrdom.’ Theirs was the gentle temper of Christian kindness; the rigorous observance of reciprocal justice; the unconquerable soul of conscious integrity.”

Who were these heroes who engendered such praise?

And why should this small group of English settlers be revered by Americans today who aren’t directly descended from them?

After all, unlike John Quincy Adams, I have no personal family connection to the Pilgrims. My family didn’t arrive on the Mayflower in 1620. They came from Lebanon on an ocean liner in 1913.

So why should Americans — diverse as we are today — call these English settlers our “Pilgrim Fathers and Mothers”? Why should we feel a kinship to them as if we were their children, when most of us don’t have a drop of their blood in our veins?

Let me tell you their story in their own words. You will see that we are all their children — whether we arrived on these shores in 1619, 1913, or were here all along.

And you will see why we chose their arrival as the date of “our true founding” and why that decision says everything about our progress as a nation.

Their story tells us who we were, who we are, and who we aspire to be.

Embarkation of the Pilgrims, painting by Robert Walter Weir (Library of Congress)

Saints and Strangers

The Pilgrims were devout Christians, and much like evangelical Christians today, these Englishmen and women sought to live by a simpler Biblical-based faith modeled after the early church of the Apostles.

They wanted to live as a community that worshipped and worked together, but England and its established Church enacted laws that forbade religious gatherings in private houses. These laws basically thwarted the Pilgrims’ ability to practice their faith as a community. So, in 1608, faced with the threat of imprisonment for their faith, the small community fled England and settled in Holland, which was known as a refuge for Protestant dissenters.

But after living a decade among the Dutch, they realized it was time to leave the Old World altogether. In 1618, Europe was on the cusp of one of the most violent periods in its history. The conflict, which became known as the Thirty Years War, would pit Protestant and Catholic European powers against each other. For the Pilgrims, the impending cataclysm seemed like the beginning of Armageddon. They felt the best course of action was to leave the Old World behind and try to establish some holy remnant in the new one.

Getting there was the hard part. The small community was not wealthy. They were humble working class folks. They were pious husbands and wives with children seeking a place where they could worship in peace, not adventurers seeking treasure and conquest on behalf of a monarch. Nevertheless, the congregation pooled its resources and obtained a land patent from the Plymouth Company to settle in an area at the northernmost tip of the Virginia Company’s colony. They would eventually receive financing from London bankers who offered to back their venture with the understanding that the Pilgrims would repay these debts with their labors in the New World.

A merchant vessel called the Mayflower was charted for them, but the London financiers made it clear that the Pilgrims were not going to be the only passengers. The investors insisted that a rag tag crew of non-religious settlers—who the Pilgrims referred to as “the Strangers”—were also coming along for the ride, and that would soon become a source of awkwardness. But that was the least of their worries, really.

Pilgrim Fathers boarding the Mayflower for their voyage to America, painting by Bernard Gribble. (Ann Ronan Pictures/Print Collector/Getty Images)


The “Embarkation of the Pilgrim Fathers” from England in September 1620, as they commence their journey on the Mayflower to the New World. (Archive Photos/Getty Images)

By the time the Mayflower left Plymouth, England, on September 6, 1620, with 102 passengers onboard, they were setting sail way too late in the year for a successful journey. Trans-Atlantic sea voyages were a frightening and often fatal endeavor. It was comparable to going to the Moon or Mars. Even the best crossing was perilous, and that would be in springtime when the weather was more moderate. To set out in September meant they were arriving in winter … But wait, it got worse…

The Mayflower at sea

After 65 days—and two deaths—at sea, the Mayflower made landfall on November 9, 1620.

“Having found a good haven and being brought safely in sight of land, they fell upon their knees and blessed the God of Heaven who had brought them over the vast and furious ocean, and delivered them from all the perils and miseries of it, again to set their feet upon the firm and stable earth, their proper element,” Bradford wrote of that moment.

But the jubilation was short lived. They soon discovered they were over 200 miles off-course. They were nowhere near Virginia. And what’s worse, it was almost winter—in Massachusetts.

“Having thus passed the vast ocean, and that sea of troubles,” the Pilgrims “had no friends to welcome them, nor inns to entertain and refresh their weather-beaten bodies, nor houses — much less towns — to repair to,” Bradford wrote:

As for the season, it was winter, and those who have experienced the winters of the country know them to be sharp and severe, and subject to fierce storms, when it is dangerous to travel to known places, — much more to search an unknown coast. Besides, what could they see but a desolate wilderness, full of wild beasts and wild men; and what multitude there might be of them they knew not!

…Summer being done, all things turned upon them a weather-beaten face; and the whole country, full of woods and thickets, presented a wild and savage view.

So, why didn’t they just turn around and head south for Virginia? Because the Mayflower’s captain told them that he couldn’t spare any more provisions. He needed to keep stores saved for his own return voyage to England. So, they had to shove off and muddle onshore as best they could because he wasn’t hanging around forever, and if they didn’t get a-move on he might just dump them onshore and abandon them to the elements before they even had time to build a shelter.

Again, Bradford, writing in third person, explained the situation the Pilgrims found themselves in:

If they looked behind them, there was the mighty ocean which they had passed, and was now a gulf separating them from all civilized parts of the world. If it be said that they had their ship to turn to, it is true; but what did they hear daily from the captain and crew? That they should quickly look out for a place with their shallop, where they would be not far off; for the season was such that the captain would not approach nearer to the shore till a harbour had been discovered which he could enter safely; and that the food was being consumed apace, but he must and would keep sufficient for the return voyage. It was even muttered by some of the crew that if they did not find a place in time, they would turn them and their goods ashore and leave them.

The Mayflower in Plymouth harbor, painting by William Formby Halsall. (Library of Congress)

The Kernel of Our Democracy

A new conflict arose before they could even get started. They had no governing agreement binding them. Their charter was for Virginia, not wherever this place was.

The “Strangers”—who weren’t especially civil or pious—felt no allegiance to the Pilgrims or to each other. They figured it was every man for himself.  But with winter setting in and with dangerously few provisions to speak of, the Pilgrims knew that if they didn’t all stick together, they would all die.

Edward Winslow explained what happened next:

This day before we came to harbor, observing some not well affected to unity and concord, but gave some appearance of faction, it was thought good there should be an association and agreement that we should combine together in one body, and to submit to such government and governors as we should by common consent agree to make and choose, and set our hands to this that follows word for word.

Thus, they wrote out and signed what became known as the Mayflower Compact, the first governing document of the Plymouth Colony—and the first document to establish self-governance in the New World.

Here are the words:

IN THE NAME OF GOD, AMEN. We, whose names are underwritten, the Loyal Subjects of our dread Sovereign Lord King James, by the Grace of God, of Great BritainFrance, and Ireland, King, Defender of the Faith, &c. Having undertaken for the Glory of God, and Advancement of the Christian Faith, and the Honour of our King and Country, a Voyage to plant the first Colony in the northern Parts of Virginia; Do by these Presents, solemnly and mutually, in the Presence of God and one another, covenant and combine ourselves together into a civil Body Politick, for our better Ordering and Preservation, and Furtherance of the Ends aforesaid: And by Virtue hereof do enact, constitute, and frame, such just and equal Laws, Ordinances, Acts, Constitutions, and Officers, from time to time, as shall be thought most meet and convenient for the general Good of the Colony; unto which we promise all due Submission and Obedience. IN WITNESS whereof we have hereunto subscribed our names at Cape-Cod the eleventh of November, in the Reign of our Sovereign Lord King James, of EnglandFrance, and Ireland, the eighteenth, and of Scotland the fifty-fourth, Anno Domini; 1620

The signatures on the Mayflower Compact, including William Brewster, William Bradford, Myles Standish, and Edward Winslow. (Three Lions/Hulton Archive/Getty Images)

The Signing of the Mayflower Compact in 1620, painting by Jean Leon Gerome Ferris (Wikimedia Commons)

It was clear to them that the only thing binding them to this governing document was their own consent to be governed by it.

“What they did was enact social compact theory that had been sort of kicked around in Europe, especially in Britain, for a while,” University of Oklahoma historian and author Professor Wilfred McClay told Breitbart News. “They created a body politic out of the consent of those who were aboard the ship, and they had the foresight to realize they should and could do that.”

The Mayflower Compact wasn’t an elaborate political and legal charter establishing a system of government, like our Constitution. Nor was it a treatise establishing a governing philosophy, like our Declaration of Independence. It was little more than a paragraph. But within that paragraph we have the kernel of our democracy.

This true historical event, taking place nearly two centuries before the signing of the Declaration of Independence, embodied a fundamental American value: the belief that government is based on the consent of the governed.

Our First Dark Winter

Having signed a governing agreement, the Plymouth settlers then elected their first governor, John Carver. During their first forays ashore, the settlers discovered that the area was largely desolate.

In the years prior to their arrival, the population of the local Indian tribes had been decimated by civil wars and by a plague brought by European fisherman. The disease had wiped out whole villages, where the settlers found only scattered bones, left to the elements because no one survived to bury them.

They decided to build their settlement on the ruins of an abandoned Indian village called Patuxet, where once as many as 2,000 Indians had lived before the plague ravaged the area.

So, finally on December 18, 1620, with the Mayflower anchored a mile offshore, the Pilgrims came ashore in the bitter cold, with rain and sleet pouring down on them, to build their settlement.

The Pilgrim Fathers coming ashore for the first time at Plymouth. (Hulton Archive/Getty Images)

The Landing of the Pilgrims at Plymouth Rock, painting by P.F. Rothermel (Library of Congress)

The Pilgrims make camp at Plymouth Colony in December of 1620, as the Mayflower lies anchored in the bay and a Native American watches furtively from the trees. (MPI/Getty Images)

Is it any wonder that they lost over half their numbers that winter?

They were ill-equipped. The weather was impossible. Many of them didn’t even leave the Mayflower, and eventually the ship was turned into a makeshift hospital for the sick and dying. Those who settled in the village lived in constant fear of being attacked by hostile Indian tribes.

During the course of the winter months, so many members of the Plymouth Colony died that they were afraid to bury their dead lest the Indians realize how thinned out their numbers had become. At one point, they propped up the corpses against the trees surrounding the settlement and placed muskets in their arms to disguise the dead to look like sentries guarding the perimeter of the colony.

By the time March came around, the settlers were barely holding on, but the captain and crew of the Mayflower were ready to leave for the return voyage to England. This was a make-or-break moment for the Plymouth Colony. Would they survive on their own with their last tie to England gone and no hope of return?

Samoset and Squanto

At that providential moment, an Indian named Samoset of the Wampanoag Tribe walked into the Plymouth camp and astonished the Pilgrims by greeting them in English, which he had learned from interacting with various contingents from the Virginia Colony.

Samoset of the Wampanoag Tribe entered the Plymouth settlement and called out a greeting of ‘Welcome’ in English. (Archive Photos/Getty Images)

The settlers learned from Samoset that this area was the Wampanoag Tribe’s territory, but the tribe had been so weakened by the plague that their leader, Massasoit, felt increasingly at the mercy of enemy tribes, who also happened to be the same ones menacing the Pilgrims.

As Winslow recounted:

[Samoset] discoursed of the whole country, and of every province, and of their sagamores, and their number of men, and strength. The wind being to rise a little, we cast a horseman’s coat about him, for he was stark naked, only a leather about his waist, with a fringe about a span long, or little more; he had a bow and two arrows, the one headed, and the other unheaded. He was a tall straight man, the hair of his head black, long behind, only short before, none on his face at all; he asked some beer, but we gave him strong water and biscuit, and butter, and cheese, and pudding, and a piece of mallard, all which he liked well, and had been acquainted with such amongst the English. He told us the place where we now live is called Patuxet, and that about four years ago all the inhabitants died of an extraordinary plague, and there is neither man, woman, nor child remaining, as indeed we have found none, so as there is none to hinder our possession, or to lay claim unto it.

Six days later, Samoset returned to the village with the Wampanoag leader Massasoit. After entertaining their visitors with food and sport, the Pilgrims and the Wampanoags negotiated a mutually beneficial agreement. They would defend each other in the event of an attack by the hostile tribes. And later on, they would establish trade with each other. To help the settlers survive the next winter, an Indian by the name of Tisquantum, or Squanto, stayed with the settlers to show them how to plant their spring crops.

Circa 1621, Massasoit, chief of the Wampanoag Tribe, pays a friendly visit to the Pilgrims’ camp at Plymouth Colony with his warriors, after signing the earliest recorded treaty in New England with Governor John Carver. (MPI/Getty Images)

Massachusetts and Virginia

Squanto’s story offers us a good opportunity to explain the difference between the Plymouth and Virginia colonies.

Squanto spoke English because in 1614, six years before the Pilgrims arrived, an expedition from the Virginia Colony led by Captain John Smith (of Pocahontas fame) charted the area around Cape Cod and Massachusetts Bay.

One of the commanders with Smith, a man named Thomas Hunt, decided to make extra money by kidnapping Indians and selling them into slavery. Squanto was among the victims Hunt trafficked to England, which is how he learned English. He eventually regained his freedom after his final captor, an English explorer named John Dermer, died during an expedition to the Wampanoag territory.

The tragic irony is that, had Squanto not been taken against his will across the ocean, he would have died with the rest of his village when Patuxet was wiped out by the plague. You see, Squanto was the sole survivor of the Patuxets—the people whose deserted village the Pilgrims had built their settlement upon.

And yet this man, who had so many reasons to curse the English, worked side by side with the Pilgrims that spring of 1621, showing them how to plant crops and assisting them in establishing trade with the surrounding tribes. Without his help, the Plymouth Colony would have failed.

Squanto (aka Tisquantum) of the Patuxet Tribe pointing out a coastal rock while serving as guide and interpreter for the Pilgrims. (Kean Collection/Getty Images)

From their encounters with Squanto and the other Indians, the men and women of Plymouth came to respect the Native people and feel shame for the treatment they had endured at the hands of other Englishmen.

Historian Nathaniel Philbrick explains one encounter:

At Cummaquid they encountered disturbing evidence that all was not forgotten on Cape Cod when it came to past English injustices in the region. An ancient woman, whom they judged to be a hundred years old, made a point of seeking out the Pilgrims “because she never saw English.” As soon as she set eyes on them, she burst into tears, “weeping and crying excessively.” They learned that three of her sons had been captured seven years before by Thomas Hunt, and she still mourned their loss. “We told them we were sorry that any Englishman should give them that offense,” Winslow wrote, “that Hunt was a bad man, and that all the English that heard of it condemned him for the same.”

And that was just one tale of the atrocities committed by European explorers before the Pilgrims even arrived in the New World. In fact, even before hearing these tales, the Pilgrims were distrustful of the attitude of the other English settlers.

The title page of John Smith’s account his exploration of New England, published in 1616.

Before they left England, the Pilgrims were looking for a military commander for their settlement. By far the most qualified man for the job was Captain John Smith (again, of Pocahontas fame). No one knew the whole region better than Smith. He literally drew the map of it. But the Pilgrims didn’t like him. They found him arrogant and too worldly and figured they could just make do with his maps without hiring the map-maker.

The dislike was mutual; Smith despised the Pilgrim’s piety and later mocked their refusal to hire him. He would dismissively describe them as “humorists” (meaning religious fanatics) and would write that the Pilgrims refused “to have any knowledge by any but themselves, pretending only religion their governor and frugality their counsel.” And he meant that as an insult!

Smith was right that the Pilgrims could have saved themselves a lot of grief if they had hired someone who knew where he was going. But in the end, the Pilgrims survived thanks to their fortitude, the grace of God, and the help of their new friends.

And, yes, they did indeed regard the Indians as their friends. As Winslow recounted that year, “We have found the Indians very faithful in their covenant of peace with us; very loving and ready to pleasure us; we often go to them, and they come to us.”

Far from being judgmental or superior to them, the Pilgrim Winslow described their Native allies as “a people without any religion or knowledge of God, yet very trusty, quick of apprehension, ripe-witted, just.”

Nearly two centuries later, John Quincy Adams would state that “no European settlement ever formed upon this continent has been more distinguished for undeviating kindness and equity toward” the Native Americans than the Pilgrims at Plymouth.

And that brings us to the Thanksgiving story.

Our First — and Most Expensive — Thanksgiving 

With the help of Squanto, the Pilgrims had a successful harvest in the fall of 1621. They had come through the first winter, after losing 60 percent of their group. But rather than mourn the 60 percent lost, they rejoiced that 40 percent still lived and gave thanks to God.

Bradford wrote:

They began now to gather in the small harvest they had, and to fit up their houses and dwellings against winter, being all well recovered in health and strength and had all things in good plenty.  For as some were thus employed in affairs abroad, others were exercised in fishing, about cod and bass and other fish, of which they took good store, of which every family had their portion. All the summer there was no want; and now began to come in store of fowl, as winter approached, of which this place did abound when they came first (but afterward decreased by degrees).  And besides waterfowl there was great store of wild turkeys, of which they took many, besides venison, etc. Besides, they had about a peck of meal a week to a person, or now since harvest, Indian corn to that proportion.

The famous Thanksgiving harvest feast that we’ve come to cherish is from Winslow:

Our harvest being gotten in, our governor sent four men on fowling, that so we might after have a special manner rejoice together after we had gathered the fruit of our labors; they four in one day killed as much fowl, as with a little help beside, served the company almost a week, at which time amongst other recreations, we exercised our arms, many of the Indians coming amongst us, and among the rest their greatest King Massasoit, with some ninety men, whom for three days we entertained and feasted, and they went out and killed five deer, which they brought to the plantation and bestowed on our governor, and upon the captain, and others.  And although it be not always so plentiful as it was at this time with us, yet by the goodness of God, we are so far from want that we often wish you partakers of our plenty.

And there you have it! The Pilgrims gathered for a harvest feast, and the Wampanoags joined them and brought venison to add to the feast, which lasted for three days and included sports (no word on whether it was football).

Let the record show that this first Thanksgiving actually was a “quintessential feel-good holiday.”

And considering how much it cost them in death, suffering, and toil to get to that celebration, I think it’s fair to say that this first Thanksgiving was, in fact, the most expensive in our history.

Thanksgiving at Plymouth, painting by Jennie Augusta Brownscombe, 1925 (National Museum of Women in the Arts)

Why Lincoln Chose 1620 to Rebuke 1619

So why did Abraham Lincoln choose to make this account of Thanksgiving a national holiday in 1863?

Our origin myth was still a matter of some debate up until that time. Throughout the early nineteenth century, Americans hotly debated whether the nation’s founding should be celebrated as the Jamestown Colony in Virginia or the Plymouth Colony in Massachusetts. The decision to favor Plymouth was helped along by the rediscovery of Bradford’s beautiful diary, Of Plymouth Plantation.

Bradford’s manuscript had disappeared from the New World in 1777 when the last royal governor of the colony took it from the Old South Church in Boston and carted it across the Atlantic to England. He probably meant this as a final insult to the patriotic New Englanders who were reviled by the British as traitors and brigands fomenting rebellion.

The first page of William Bradford’s ‘Of Plymouth Plantation’ (State Library of Massachusetts)

For nearly a century Bradford’s manuscript was lost to Americans, until one Boston scholar happened to see a passage in another book quoting Bradford’s journal. He eventually discovered that the manuscript had been housed all that time in the library of the Bishop of London. (Yes, the irony — the Pilgrim Bradford’s journal was being held by a bishop of the very Church that forced Bradford’s persecuted community to flee from England.)

For decades, the Brits refused to return the manuscript to its proper owners in the United States. (They really know how to hold a grudge.)

But in 1856 the British allowed a special edition of Bradford’s journal to be published, and that inspired a renewed appreciation for the Pilgrims and their history.

The publication came right at a time when our nation was on the cusp of a great conflagration—as bloody and catastrophic for us as the war that caused the Pilgrims to flee Europe. It was a fight over our most basic and sacred values: the right of all men—not just Englishmen—to live in freedom and enjoy the fruits of self-governance.

So, is it any wonder that in the midst of the bloodiest year of our Civil War—just one month before he delivered his Gettysburg Address—Abraham Lincoln decided once and for all that our nation’s founding should harken to Plymouth, not Virginia?

Of course, Lincoln chose to honor the ancestors of the New England abolitionists, not the rebellious slaveowners of Virginia.

On October 3, 1863, our 16th president declared that Thanksgiving would be commemorated as a national holiday every year on the last week in November in honor of the Pilgrim fathers.

In this sense, Lincoln chose the events of 1620 as our true founding in order to repudiate the events of 1619.

We chose the Pilgrims as our founding myth because they embodied our most cherished ideals. They were the best of us.

They endured despite the odds; and through trial and error, they established the principles of self-governance, private property, a common defense, and peaceful commerce as a means of coexistence. They even established the practice of religious tolerance and pluralism with the “Strangers” among them, who became friends.

John Alden with his wife, Priscilla, at the Plymouth Colony. Alden is said to be the first person from the Mayflower to set foot on Plymouth Rock in 1620. Painting by George H. Boughton. (Frederic Lewis/Archive Photos/Getty Images)

What’s more, the decision to embrace the Pilgrims as our true founders was made at a time when Americans were most keenly aware of the scourge of slavery because they were fighting a bloody civil war to eradicate it. These Americans understood that slavery was not just a moral blight; it was a deadly contradiction that we couldn’t live with and still pretend to uphold the self-evident truth that all men are created equal. The generation that suffered the most to abolish slavery chose the Pilgrims as our founders because the Pilgrims embodied the ideals that inspired them to free the slaves. They wanted us to know that our nation was founded on God-given freedom, not racism.

This sentiment was made clear in the speech Massachusetts Gov. Roger Wolcott delivered in 1897 at the official ceremony to accept the return of Bradford’s manuscript by England to its rightful owners in America.

The Plymouth settlement was “the birthplace of religious liberty, the cradle of a free Commonwealth,” Wolcott said:

In the varied tapestry which pictures our national life, the richest spots are those where gleam the golden threads of conscience, courage, and faith, set in the web by that little band [of Pilgrims]. May God in His mercy grant that the moral impulse which founded this nation may never cease to control its destiny; that no act of any future generation may put in peril the fundamental principles on which it is based — of equal rights in a free state, equal privileges in a free church, and equal opportunities in a free school.

Equal rights, equal privileges, equal opportunities – that is what Americans have always aspired to uphold. Conscience, courage, faith – that is what the Pilgrims stood for and what they prayed their descendants would stand for.

To honor the founding of Plymouth in 1620 is not to ignore the horrific history of American slavery that began in 1619 in Virginia. And to celebrate Thanksgiving is not to dismiss the atrocities committed against our Native communities, even sadly at the hands of the Pilgrims’ descendants. On Thanksgiving, we acknowledge that the Pilgrims and the Natives did, in fact, come together in peace in November 1621.

We celebrate their story—and the ritual reenactment of it with a turkey feast and prayers of thanksgiving—to acknowledge our highest aspirations, not to whitewash our history or minimize our mistakes. Thanksgiving affirms who we want to be because it commemorates who the Pilgrims actually were.

The National Monument to the Forefathers in Plymouth, Massachusetts. The 81-foot-tall statue (center) was dedicated in 1889. The monument’s inscriptions include a dedication panel (left), a list of the Mayflower passengers (top right), and an inscription from William Bradford’s manuscript (bottom right). (Wikimedia Commons)

“There is a kind of audacity about these people,” Professor McClay told Breitbart News. “The journeys were dangerous. The habitats into which they were coming were brutal. They lost many lives, and yet they had this sense—and [the Puritan leader John] Winthrop says it in his sermon—that they were on a mission from God, that ‘the eyes of all people are upon us’—which, when you think about it, this is like somebody going to the Moon—the dark side of the Moon—and saying, ‘The eyes of all people are upon us.’ Well, actually you’re on the Moon. Nobody’s watching! And yet they were so deeply committed to the vision of what they were doing, and that was the germ of what became ultimately a great nation.”

Actually, they knew that God was watching and all the future generations of their children.

And, yes, we are all their children.

In Of Plymouth Plantation, Bradford described the fateful moment when the Pilgrims realized that they had landed in an unsettled area and there was no way to turn back:

What, then, could now sustain them but the spirit of God, and His grace? Ought not the children of their fathers rightly to say: Our fathers were Englishmen who came over the great ocean, and were ready to perish in this wilderness; but they cried unto the Lord, and He heard their voice, and looked on their adversity.

… Let them therefore praise the Lord, because He is good, and His mercies endure forever. Yea, let them that have been redeemed of the Lord, show how He hath delivered them from the hand of the oppressor. When they wandered forth into the desert-wilderness, out of the way, and found no city to dwell in, both hungry and thirsty, their soul was overwhelmed in them. Let them confess before the Lord His loving kindness, and His wonderful works before the sons of men!

Amen. And Happy Thanksgiving on this 400th anniversary.

Pilgrims Going to Church, painting by George Henry Boughton (New York Historical Society)

Rebecca Mansour is Senior Editor-at-Large for Breitbart News. Follow her on Twitter at @RAMansour.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/11/25/mansour-the-pilgrims-progress-honoring-our-forefathers-on-the-400th-anniversary-of-the-first-and-most-expensive-thanksgiving/

VIDEO Nothing Can Separate Us

John MacArthur Feb 12, 2012

Now we come to message number 13 – I never intended that, but message number 13 in Romans 8 series on the Holy Spirit, and we certainly welcome you who are guests to our church to the end of our series.  Regrettably, some of you haven’t been with us in the previous messages, so you’re a little bit behind the curve, but that’s okay.  Turn to Romans 8, and while you’re doing that, I do want to make a comment about the worship book. 

There’s a note about it in the Grace Today.  There have been some rather careful edits in that book that has come out in past years and some added material to it, to enrich it and update it.  And perhaps the most notable thing is that the final chapter in the book is on music, what is appropriate music for worship, and there are things in that chapter that are unique to the book, and I just wanted to let you know that that and another brand new chapter sort of set it apart from the past editions of it. 

And speaking of worship, the series that we’re doing has one goal in mind and that is to help us worship the Holy Spirit as we should.  When I gave the first message and I called for worship of the Holy Spirit, after the service was over, I didn’t get very far until I was stopped in my tracks by someone who was outraged – outraged that I would even suggest that we ought to worship, offer praise, prayer to the Holy Spirit, which points out the problem.  We need to worship the Holy Spirit in the same way that we worship the Son of God and God the Father Himself. 

In Revelation 22:9, there’s a very brief command and it says, “Worship God.”  Worship God.  The last chapter of the Bible, “Worship God.”  That isn’t anything new.  If you go to the beginning of the Bible, the Pentateuch, the writings of Moses, you will find there are many calls to worship God.  If you get into the books of history, the books of poetry, the prophets, all the sacred writings that make up the Old Testament, everywhere you go, you will be repeatedly commanded in one way or another to worship God.  In fact, Jesus tells us in John 4 that the Father seeks true worshipers.  We are described by Paul in Philippians 3 as those who worship God in the Spirit, the Spirit of God.  We are worshipers of God, that’s what we do, that’s why we’re here.  God is the audience and we are offering Him worship as we should every day individually in our lives and do collectively when we gather like this. 

When the Bible instructs us to worship God, the God we are to worship is the triune God, who is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, the true and living God, the only God, three in one.  When we are commanded – as we are so frequently – to worship God, that must mean all three members of the Trinity.  In no sense are we to offer any member of the Trinity any less worship than we offer any other member of the Trinity.  We are not to assume that when Scripture says to worship God that somehow we are to worship certain persons of the Trinity and not others or certain persons more than others.  Should we not assume that every command in Scripture to worship God is a command to worship the Holy Spirit who is fully God?  When we get a glimpse of heaven in the fourth chapter of Revelation, and we read in verses 10 and 11 that the 24 elders, along with the living creatures, fall down before Him who sits on the throne and will worship Him who lives forever and ever, are we to assume that that is one member of the Trinity or two but not the third?  When the worship is given to us, the very words of heavenly worship, “Worthy are You, our Lord, and our God to receive glory and honor and power for You created all things and because of Your Will they exist and were created,” that that is excluding the Holy Spirit?  I think not. 

We are to worship the God who is God, and God declares Himself to be “I am who I am” and who He is is three in one.  And yet when we talk about worshiping the Holy Spirit, it sounds new and it sounds novel, and for some people it even sounds wrong.  And the argument tends to be, “Well no, no, the Spirit points to Christ.”  Well, of course the Spirit points to Christ, but in pointing to Christ, He does not diminish His own deity.  He does not depreciate His own identity.  He does not intend to diminish worship given to Him.  He points us to Christ, but He is no less God, and God is to be worshiped. 

The Holy Spirit is fully God, gloriously God, holy God, eternal God, worthy of worship.  The Holy Spirit is equally the possessor of all divine attributes that belong to the Father and the Son.  The Holy Spirit equally participates in every divine activity for the Holy Spirit is inseparable from the Father and the Son.  The Holy Spirit participates in everything from creation to consummation.  All true worship, then, embraces the Holy Spirit, includes the Holy Spirit.  He cannot be separated from the Trinity whom we worship and whom we praise.

Why has this not been clear to us?  Because for many people, that point that I made about the Holy Spirit pointing to Christ, which Jesus disclosed in His last night with the disciples in the Upper Room, seems to some people – and it’s caught traction and become part of Christian thinking – that the Holy Spirit is therefore deflecting worship toward Christ.  Not so.  He shows us Christ for a very clear purpose, which we studied some weeks ago, that we might see the model of perfected humanity, and as we gaze at the glory of the perfected human, He changes us into His image.  To show us Christ is not to defer worship.  It is another way in which we should worship Him and honor Him. 

But beyond that sort of strange quirk in traditional understanding, even worse the Holy Spirit is not considered today in the same way that the Son and the Father are considered because there has been for many, many years now, coming from the third force, the third column in the Christian world – first column, Protestantism; second, Roman Catholicism; the third, Pentecostal Charismaticism – there has been coming from that third wave terrible, tragic confusion about the Holy Spirit, misrepresentation of the Holy Spirit, blasphemy of the Holy Spirit, insults directed at the Holy Spirit, and they are relentless and they are severe and they are serious. 

The evangelical church’s understanding of the Holy Spirit has been mangled.  Biblical truth has been depreciated and in its place have come bizarre things attributed to the Holy Spirit by people who have, in many cases, absolutely no relationship to the Holy Spirit whatsoever.  Endless assaults are waged on His person and His work coming out of that third column.  This movement has kidnapped the Holy Spirit and held Him hostage, and all criticisms of their aberrations and blasphemies are denounced by them as being divisive, unloving, and intolerant. 

Obviously, thinking through all of this over the last three months and preaching all of this has stirred my own heart and hearts of people around me who are saying, “We need to do a book on this, we need to bring this to light, it’s been a long time since Charismatic Chaos came out, this needs to be addressed,” and so we’ve decided to do that.  But one of the compelling reasons to do that was the fact that we had a discussion the other day and it was brought to our attention that in searching the literature on the Holy Spirit and the things that are being ascribed to the Spirit today that are not true about Him and about His works, the doctrine of the Holy Spirit has gone, in a sense, unprotected.  The truth of the Holy Spirit has gone unaffirmed, in this sense, that it was the – maybe the early or mid-1990s since there was any definitive book produced on the true person and work of the Holy Spirit.  Evangelicals have gone silent on this issue under the intimidation of that third column.  This is unacceptable.  We cannot allow this to go on, the Holy Spirit to be grieved, quenched, insulted, and blasphemed. 

It’s amazing to me that the evangelical world doesn’t tolerate attacks on God the Father.  When there came an attack a few years ago called the Openness theology which denied that God knew the future, denied His omniscience, it not only denied that He knew the future, it denied that He could control the future.  This is a massive attack on the nature of God, and evangelicals rose up en masse to denounce that attack of Openness theology and became prolific in providing material for that denunciation.  Over the last 15 years or so, 20 years, there have been assaults on the person of Christ, assaults on His nature but more directly on His work on the cross, the doctrine of justification, the biblical doctrine of justification at the heart of the gospel, most notably in a movement called “The New Perspective on Paul,” which was a denial of the doctrine of imputation and justification.  There is no end of literature that has been amassed, a huge library of literature defending the doctrine of justification, defending the Son of God against these attacks.  But no one member of the Trinity in the same period of time has been attacked nearly to the degree that the Holy Spirit has been attacked, and I say for about ten years there has been virtually nothing to come to the defense of a biblical understanding of the Holy Spirit.  And as a result, there is confusion if not indifference toward Him and a lack of ability to worship Him for who He is, and He should be worshiped. 

We understand blasphemy of the Holy Spirit from non-Christians.  We understand blasphemy of the Holy Spirit from false Christians and false teachers.  But we, as Christians, while not blaspheming the Holy Spirit can be guilty of grieving the Holy Spirit.  And it is a grief to the Holy Spirit, of course, for us to sin because we sin against Him who is in us, but it is a grief to the Holy Spirit to think wrongly about Him, to underestimate what He does, to be unappreciative or ungrateful, to fail to worship Him out of a grasp of the wondrous grace and the wondrous power of His continuing work on our behalf all the way to eternal glory. 

So we have been looking at Romans 8 to refocus on the Holy Spirit, to fully embrace Him in our worship.  We know that God the Father initiated the work of salvation, God the Son validated and demonstrated the work of salvation, and the Holy Spirit activates and completes the work of salvation in the believer.  We have literally begun to catalogue the work of the Holy Spirit for us as believers. He regenerates us, He participates in our justification, He sanctifies us, He confirms our adoption as sons of God, He indwells us, He baptizes us, immerses us into the union with other believers that we call the body of Christ.  He gives us spiritual gifts by which we minister to one another.  He strengthens us in the inner man for all righteousness.  He guides us.  He produces right attitudes in us.  He delivers us from sin.  He illuminates the Scripture to our understanding.  But His greatest work and that which brings us the greatest joy is that He guarantees our future glory, He guarantees our eternal glory.  And, of course, at this point the Pentecostal/Charismatic movement renders against Him one of the greatest insults of all by denying the doctrine of eternal security, perseverance of the saints, and attacking His most wondrous work by claiming that He does not necessarily keep all believers secure and safe until eternal glory.

This week I was reading the writings of Charles Finney, whose ministry attacked a lot of things in the Scripture, not the least of which was this doctrine.  Finney said, “You are sealed by the Spirit but you can shatter the seal.”  The testimony of the Word of God is not consistent with that error. 

Listen to the words of Ephesians 1:13-14.  In Him – that is, in Christ – you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation, having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise, who is given as a pledge of our inheritance with a view to the redemption of God’s own possession, to the praise of His glory.  We are God’s possession; God will redeem us to the praise of His own glory.  The Holy Spirit is given as a pledge of that future redemption, which is called our inheritance, and that is why He is identified as the Spirit of promise because He is the guarantee of God’s promise of heaven. 

Peter similarly writes:  “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ who, according to His great mercy, has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead to obtain an inheritance which is imperishable and undefiled and will not fade away, reserved in heaven for you who are protected by the power of God, for a salvation to be revealed in the last time.”  The Holy Spirit is the seal, the guarantee, the down payment, the first fruits, the earnest, the power, the protector of every true believer, who brings us to final glory. 

That becomes the theme of Romans 8 starting in verse 17.  Verse 17, you first read the word “glorified,” and from then on to verse 39, it is all focused on our future glory and the plans that God has to secure us to that end.  We’ve gone through all of that in great detail.  We’ve learned in verses 26 and 27 that the Holy Spirit constantly from within every true believer is interceding for us in a communion that is not in any language.  It is too deep for words.  It is inter-Trinitarian groaning in which the Spirit intercedes, praying for our eternal glory consistently with God who knows what His plans are and has purposed our glory.  And the Spirit, as well, knows the plans of God, the heart of God.  So God has a plan.  Christ provided for the fulfillment of that plan.  The Spirit prays for the completion of that plan in accord with the Will of God. 

As a result, verse 28 says, “Everything works together for good.”  Things, as we live life, God has a good purpose in them, that is true for His glory.  But this is primarily talking about ultimate, final good.  All things are working together for good because we have been loved by God and love Him in return according to His purpose. 

So the Spirit then effects the good intention and ending and purpose of God on our behalf.  The plan of God, He foreknew us, He predestined us, He called us, He justified us, and He will glorify us, and our glory will be conforming us to the image of His Son, verse 29 says.  We’ve gone through all of that in detail.  God has a plan to choose people that He will glorify.  Christ provides the sacrifice that pays for their sin to make the plan possible.  The Holy Spirit becomes the power of the plan.  He regenerates us, sanctifies us, protects us, and one day will raise us to glory.  We are caught up in that plan.  We are as secure as the Father’s plan because what God purposes, He does.  We are as secure as the Son’s provision.  Christ actually paid in full for all our sins – not a potential payment, but an actual payment.  And we are, thirdly, as secure as the power of the Holy Spirit who intercedes and who keeps us to glory. 

Now, having said all of that great theology, come to verse 31, where we dropped off last time, and Paul knows there will be some objections.  So he assumes that there would be objections from some who would say, “Well, maybe there are some persons who can change this.  Maybe there are some persons who can influence a dramatic alteration in the plan of God.”  Like Finney says, “You can shatter the seal.”  I read a couple of other writers who hold that view and they said the same thing, “The Holy Spirit seals you as long as you don’t break the seal.”  Is that possible?  So we could ask the question, “Are there some humans that can do that?”  What shall we say to these things?  Are there some humans that can do it?  The answer, verse 31:  “If God is for us, who’s against us?”  Are there humans stronger than God?  If God is for us, does it really matter who might be against us?  Does it matter who might want to destroy our faith?  If God is for us, that settles it because there is no power greater than God.  There is no human or human system or human religion or human influence or human society or human form of education or human pressure that is greater than God. 

“Well,” you say, “maybe God would do it.  Maybe God would be weary of us.”  God?  Verse 32 answers that.  “He who didn’t spare His own Son but delivered Him over for us all”?  You mean God who when we were enemies gave us the best gift, His Son?  He would turn against us?  The end of verse 32:  “How will He not also with Him, with His Son, freely give us all things?”  That’s an argument from the greater to the lesser.  If when we were enemies He gave the best gift to save us, will He not now that we are children of His give us lesser gifts to keep us?  That’s just logical.  That’s the argument from the greater to the lesser.  God, who did the most for us, gave the best gift when we were enemies of His, will do whatever lesser things He needs to do now that we’re His sons to keep us. 

Somebody might say, “Well, what about Satan?  Maybe Satan can pull us out of the hands of God, he’s very powerful.”  He tried it with Job, he tried it with Peter, he tried it with Paul and he tried it with the high priest in Zechariah chapter 3.  You have four illustrations of it in Scripture.  He is identified here in verse 33:  “Who will bring a charge against God’s elect?”  Or verse 34:  Who is the one who condemns?  Who is the one who is that’s always before God condemning us?  Who’s the accuser of the brethren?  Revelation 12:10.  Satan and his demons as well gather around the presence of God and bring endless accusations against believers night and day, it says in Scripture.  Can he succeed, the accuser of the brethren?  Could he break Job’s faith?  No.  Could he break Peter’s faith when he tried to sift Peter?  Could he break Paul when messenger demons literally were tearing into the ministry of Paul?  Was that enough to shatter Paul?  Can he successfully bring a condemning accusation that’ll cause God to turn? 

Well, for one thing, saving faith can’t be broken, the purpose of God can’t be thwarted, but you also have the additional reality of Christ at the right hand of the Father, interceding for us against all accusations and saying again and again, “For that I paid in full in My death.” 

Well then, somebody might suggest, “Boy, we’re in trouble if Christ turns against us.  What if Christ were to turn against us?”  Verse 34:  What?  Christ Jesus is He who died, yea rather, who was raised, who is at the right hand of God.  In other words, He died for us, He was raised for us, His death and resurrection were the perfect satisfaction of God, and thus He was exalted at the right hand of God, having fully accomplished our redemption and who also intercedes for us.  He is the great high priest who intercedes for us, our great heavenly advocate. 

It won’t be any humans because God is more powerful than they.  Won’t be God because He gave us the best when we were enemies.  It won’t be Satan because he can’t successfully bring a condemnation against us – Christ has already paid in full for them.  It won’t be Christ – He ever lives to make intercession for us.  Only one possibility remains then.  Us.  You can break the seal.  You can shatter the seal, as Finney put it.  Can you?  Why would you do that?  Oh, circumstances in life.  Well, life could get pretty tough.  As long as everything is going good – that was the argument with Job, wasn’t it?  He’s blessed, he’s rich, he’s got it all, family, crops, animals, wealth – no wonder he’s faithful.  Can we literally exercise power to sever our relationship to the Lord?  Can our faith dissolve, break, crumble under certain circumstances? 

So we go from persons in verses 32 to 34 – 31 to 34, to circumstances in verses 35 to 37, follow them, it’s just pretty simple.  This is worst-case scenario.  The question is:  Who will or what will, brought by who – who – behind all these whats, there’s a who.  If there’s tribulation, distress, persecution, famine, nakedness, peril, sword, somebody’s responsible for that.  These are the kind of circumstances that are extreme.  Can extreme circumstances destroy our faith, cause us to abandon the Holy Spirit?  Who will separate us from the love of Christ?  Just a reminder that what holds us is the love of Christ for us.  That’s what’s hold us, the love of Christ for us.  It’s mentioned in verse 39, by the way, as the love of God – the love of God.  And I might add, it encompasses the love of the Holy Spirit.  We are loved by the Trinity.  Can something happen to cause that love to be broken? 

Well, let’s paint a picture of extremity.  Seven hypothetical realities escalating, tribulation – tribulation, that’s outside pressure.  Things are going bad on the outside and this assumes attacks coming at us.  The word thlipsis means – it’s a squeezing, outward difficulty, rejection, trouble, harm.  It’s putting pressure on us on the outside.  The next word, distress, is a word that refers to inside pressure.  It’s two words that mean to be crunched into a narrow space but it has to do with the inside.  When outside pressure comes, it has an effect on the inside, right?  You start to react to it, fear, anxiety, doubt, questions, dread, and you become victimized by a certain level of panic.  You lose your sense of confidence because the pressure is so great. 

Can pressure come on the outside that can cause you to be so compressed on the inside that you literally are led into fear and anxiety and it gets worse?  And then persecution.  This is abuse – abuse – and for the purpose of this argument by Paul, it would be abuse for the testimony of Jesus, physical suffering, mental suffering, things are really going badly for you now.  This is the worst-case scenario.  You got all kinds of issues on the outside crushing you in, they get on the inside and they begin to produce anxiety, fear, and dread and then it gets worse, outright persecution, digmos breaks out at the hands of Christ rejecters.  It gets extreme because famine follows.  You don’t get food.  You’re deprived, maybe you’re in jail, you’re in prison.  That is not the end of it, it gets even worse.  You’re in rags.  There’s no provision for you.  You end up naked, you need clothes.  It gets worse.  You’re in peril, you’re on the dangerous edge, and finally they start rattling a sword.  It’s the end. 

Can that do it?  That’s the worst-case scenario.  You’re about to be martyred.  You’re about to have your head hacked off.  Well, by the way, that’s Paul’s personal testimony, and it happened more than once that he got to the brink of peril.  And it finally happened that his head was cut off by a sword.  Can that drive you to doubt?  Can that drive you to reject Jesus Christ?  Can that drive you to turn away from Christ?  Turn away from God?  Can that do it?  And he quotes from Psalm 44 to say that this is kind of the experience that the people of God have had through history, not just us.  He’s quoting from Psalm 44.  There’s a plea from the people of God in the Old Testament for God to deliver them because they’re in distress.  “For Your sake we’re being put to death all day long, we’re considered sheep to be slaughtered.”  They were suffering in the past.  As you know, Israel suffered at the hands of its enemies many times.  Being connected to God can be a very dangerous situation.  It happened then, it happens now.  And when it happens, is that enough to shatter us?  Smash the seal? 

One of the wonderful treasures that I have is a original set of the Foxe’s Book of Martyrs.  Three volumes.  You stack them up, they’re that thick and they’re this big – huge things.  Foxe’s Book of Martyrs contains the testimony of literally hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of people who went through that process that Paul just described here and ended up at the sword or the flame, burned at the stake, or myriad ways that they were executed.  And the books are a testimony to the fact that their faith did not fail – could not fail – because they had a faith designed by God, a supernatural faith just like yours. 

“In this you greatly rejoice,” Peter goes on to say, “for a little while if necessary you’ve been distressed” – there’s that same word – “by various trials so that the proof of your faith being more precious than gold, which is perishable, even though tested by fire may be found to result in praise and glory and honor at the revelation of Jesus Christ.”  And then he says this:  “Though you don’t see Him, you love Him.”  Even then you love Him.  You don’t turn on Him, you don’t resent Him, you love Him.  You love Him all the way to death. 

Verse 37 sums it up:  “In all these things we overwhelmingly conquer through Him who loved us.”  We love Him because what?  He loved us first.  No, there’s no circumstance that’s going to break this.  There is no circumstance that’ll separate us from the love of Christ.  There’s no circumstance that will separate us from the love of God.  There is no person who will separate us from that love, the love of the Trinity.  It is not possible.  There is no power that can shatter our faith.  There is no power that can break the seal of the Spirit.  There is no accusation against us that Christ has not paid for in full.  There is no higher court than God, and there’s no greater power than the secure power of the Holy Spirit.  We come out hupernikmenhupernika.  You get the word Nike from the Greek verb to conquer, to be the victor, super-victor, huper-victor.  We are more than conquerors; we overwhelmingly conquer, not in in our own strength, but through Him who loved us.  Through Him who loved us. 

Trial, no matter how severe, tests our faith and proves it true.  Therefore, it’s to our greater good and our greater joy, even in the most severe suffering.  It does something else.  It earns an eternal weight of glory in the life to come.  This kind of extremity/severity makes a nobler Christian here and a stronger Christian, not a weaker one, and one whose faith is firm and whose assurance is settled.  It’s the proof of your faith when it stands that test.  It proves you have the real thing, and that’s a gift of God to rejoice over, and it also leads to a greater reward. 

Paul wrote this while he was in Corinth in the winter, and he had no idea, nor did the church at Rome to whom he wrote, that a short time would elapse and then they would see him in this very situation.  He would stand in need of the very comforting truths which he wrote in this chapter because all the things that are written in the list, he would experience.  He would himself be this time killed by a sword.  And the readers in Rome would be caught up in persecution, men and women whose blood would soak the sands of the great Roman arenas and amphitheaters.  But the honor of Christ and the love of Christ was safe in their keeping because they were safe in His keeping.  They didn’t need to fear any of these things, including death.  They were mauled by wild beasts, they were soaked in tar and lit as torches, they fought with men and beasts and hell’s demons, but they were safe in the love of Christ, safe in the love of God, safe in the protecting love of the Holy Spirit.  Safe until they entered into glory. 

Paul ends by saying, “We’re super conquerors.”  And then there’s a beautiful closing refrain, verses 38 and 39, that almost shouldn’t be explained, it should just be read or sung.  For I am convinced – are you?  Are you convinced of this great truth?  I am persuaded, I am confident, I have come to a settled conclusion that neither death, the great enemy, or life with all its dangers and difficulties, its temptations and troubles, nor angels, holy angels, hypothetically, nor principalities, unholy angels, demons, nor things present, nor things to come, the here and now or the future, nor powers – that’s plural in the New Testament and when it’s used plural in the New Testament, the Greek form, it refers to miracles, mighty works, some supernatural power – nothing, so far, not death, not life, not holy angels, not fallen angels, not anything happening now or anything in the future, not any supernatural, mighty, transcendent power, nor height – that is a term that refers to a star at the apex of its orbit – nor depth, bathos – that’s the star at the lowest point of its orbit, nothing at the highest point of the universe or the lowest point of the universe – nothing, nor any other created thing, nothing in life, nothing in death, nothing in the world of angels, nothing in the world of demons, nothing in time, nothing in eternity, no miracle power, nothing on earth, nothing in heaven from the edges of space, nothing, no created thing in the entire created universe will be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord. 

Jeremiah 31:3:  God says, “I’ve loved you with an everlasting love.”  That, dear friends, is because we are kept by the Holy Spirit.  We need to worship Him for that gracious work.  Let’s pray.

Lord, we thank You that we have been able to look at the glory of our salvation in this wonderful way, through the ministry in particular of the Holy Spirit.  We know that Christ even went to the cross in the power of the Holy Spirit.  As we come to remember His death for us, we want to be grateful from the bottom of our hearts for this massive work of salvation that began in eternity past with election, went through the cross, out the open tomb, and is produced in us by the ongoing ministry of the dear Holy Spirit.  We worship You, O God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, for this mighty work of amazing grace.  We thank You for it.  As we come now to remember the cross of Christ, cleanse our hearts, fill us with praise – praise as it should be offered to You, our great God.

https://www.gty.org/library/sermons-library/90-429

AUDIO Atlas: I Watched The Nation’s ‘Top Scientists’ Lie About COVID And Get Away With It – killing patients on ventilators – 365 Studies that Prove the Efficacy of Ivermectin and HCQ – Distorted reporting – NEJM COVID Vaccines, Spike Proteins may Lead to Myocarditis –

Atlas: I Watched The Nation’s ‘Top Scientists’ Lie About COVID And Get Away With It

After watching this debacle on TV, I knew full well what was coming later that day. The media would latch on to this and create even more public panic.

By Scott Atlas NOVEMBER 23, 2021

This is an excerpt from the author’s new book, “A Plague Upon Our House,” which releases December 7 and is available now for preorder.

[CDC Director Robert] Redfield’s congressional testimony on September 23 immediately caught my attention. I watched in disbelief as Redfield told Congress that “more than 90 percent of the population”—more than three hundred million people in the US—remains susceptible to the illness.

The statement was based on incomplete and outdated data, as well as an apparent lack of understanding of the literature, and it struck me as one of the most erroneous and fear-inducing proclamations of any public health official to that moment. Approximately two hundred thousand Americans had already died from COVID; the last thing the public needed was an exaggeration of the future risks, implying to some that ten times that number could still die.

First of all, the numbers didn’t add up. At that point, confirmed cases in the US already totaled approximately seven million, and the CDC itself had estimated that approximately ten times the number of confirmed cases, a very conservative estimate, were likely to have had the infection. A Stanford seropositivity study back in April had shown that confirmed cases underestimated the total infections by a factor of approximately forty times. It made no sense that only 9 percent, or thirty million Americans, had been infected.

Second, the 9 percent calculation was blatantly wrong. That number came from antibody testing by the states. I looked at the CDC website myself, and sure enough, the data was based on antiquated testing from several states.

Some antibody totals were pulled from several months earlier, before many of those states had experienced a significant number of cases. It therefore grossly underestimated the number of cases that had already occurred. The data was simply not valid, but you needed to pay attention to the details.

More importantly, Redfield’s basic claim was fundamentally flawed. The conclusion that serum antibody testing revealed the entire population of those protected from COVID was counter to an entire body of published literature and contrary to fundamental knowledge of immunology, including other coronavirus infections.

It was well known that antibody tests showed one cross-section in time—they were transient—even though immune protection can last. From studies on SARS-2 and most other viruses, antibody levels change over a span of months. They typically appear in the first couple of weeks, peak in a few months, and then decrease over a span of several months.

The literature on COVID had already shown these patterns. A month before this press conference, a Nature Reviews Immunology study on COVID-19 explicitly stated, “The absence of specific antibodies in the serum does not necessarily mean an absence of immune memory,” and explained, “memory B-cells and T-cells may be maintained even if there are not measurable levels of serum antibodies.”

Japan’s study demonstrated this dramatically. In their study, antibody levels increased from 5.8 percent to 46.8 percent over the course of the summer. The most dramatic increase occurred in late June and early July, paralleling the rise in daily confirmed cases within Tokyo, which peaked on August 4.

Out of the 350 individuals who completed both offered tests, 21.4 percent of those who tested negative became positive, and 12.2 percent of initially positive participants became negative for antibodies. A striking 81.1 percent of IgM-antibody-positive cases at first testing became negative in only one month. They stated that “[antibody tests] may significantly underestimate previous COVID-19 infections.” It had also been widely reported in several major scientific journals that antibody responses are not necessarily detectable in all COVID patients, especially those with less severe forms.

But the flaws in Redfield’s estimate extended deeper. Even those familiar with first-year college biology know that other components of the immune system, memory B-cell and T-cells, provide protection from virus infections. Some T-cells kill the virus, and they also help antibodies form. T-cells develop and provide protection that lasts far longer, even after antibodies disappear—sometimes for years in other SARS viruses.

T-cells for this virus had already been documented, even in people unexposed to SARS-2, meaning that in these cases, cross-protection was present from T-cells originating in response to other coronaviruses. T-cells had also been found in individuals with completely asymptomatic SARS-2 infections.

NIH Director Francis Collins had highlighted that very data in his Director’s Blog a few weeks earlier, writing, “In fact, immune cells known as memory T cells also play an important role in the ability of our immune systems to protect us against many viral infections, including—it now appears—COVID-19.”

Scientists from some of the top research institutions in the world, like Sweden’s Karolinska Institute, San Diego’s La Jolla Institute, Duke University, Berlin, and others had published this evidence. Karolinska demonstrated T-cell immunity in both asymptomatic and mild cases of COVID—even if antibody-negative.

Singapore researchers had noted robust T-cell responses to this virus, SARS2, from seventeen-year-old SARS1 samples. Since T-cells are obviously not discovered by antibody tests, those individuals were not included in Redfield’s count. Yet he apparently had not considered this essential, indeed fundamental, point as he testified to Congress and made headlines.

After watching this debacle on TV, I knew full well what was coming later that day. The media would latch on to this and create even more public panic. I also knew that the responsibility for clarifying this grossly erroneous statement would be mine. There was no question it would come up at the president’s press conference, and even if it did not, it still needed to be explained.

I rushed over to Derek Lyons’s office to update him and to make sure we would alert the president beforehand. A few others in the West Wing were there, so I summarized to them what had been said to Congress.

The mood ranged from amazement to dejection to frustration. An advisor to the president on legal matters warned me, with a smile on his face, “Scott, don’t just bluntly say, ‘Redfield is wrong!’ Say something softer, like ‘He misstated things.’”

I nodded, knowing that I needed to restrain my words, even though this was the same man who had tried to destroy me in the national press a few days earlier. But this wasn’t personal at all. Clarifying the facts about the pandemic and countering the unending barrage of misinformation and pseudoscience about it, in this case coming from within the administration itself, was one of my most important roles in this national crisis.

During the pre-brief in the Oval Office a few hours later, I outlined the issue to the president. It was decided, as expected, that I would answer the question when it came up. And so it did.

A reporter from ABC News directly asked me if Redfield’s statement that more than 90 percent of Americans remained susceptible to the disease was true. I took the friendly advice I had received earlier in the day.

“I think that Dr. Redfield misstated something there,” I said, and then did my best to calmly explain the problems with outdated information and the contribution of cross-reactive T-cells and T-cell protection that would not have been included in his data. I correctly stated what was widely known and factual—that the protection from the virus “is not solely determined by the percent of people who have antibodies.” During my answer, as I fended off interruptions, I tried to explain in understandable language as best I could.

I also made a serious effort to be somewhat delicate, because I felt extremely uncomfortable about having to correct the director of the CDC on the national stage.

Unfortunately, my disgust with the confrontational mood in that press room prevented me from being more diplomatic when that reporter asked, “Who are we to believe?” My reflexive answer was “You’re supposed to believe in the science, and I am telling you the science.” Then I referred him to several expert scientists by name. However, I had the strong sense that he was not really interested in the facts at all. Rather, it was another attempt to amplify discord.

After exiting the press room, I walked alongside the president. He briefly stopped to check the news coverage on the set of TV monitors outside the briefing room, as he typically chose to do. After some banter between the president and the staff standing in the area, we began walking back toward the Oval Office.

President Trump turned to me on his right, smiling wryly but with a genuinely puzzled look on his face. “Is Redfield political or just stupid?” he asked, subtly shaking his head. I looked right back at the president and hesitated. The answer was obvious to both of us.

Needless to say, the media immediately played up the disagreement between me and Redfield. It fed into their narrative of conflict between me and the other Task Force doctors, one that Redfield personally caused with his offensive and unwarranted remark that everything I said was “false.”

Later, Dr. Fauci appeared on TV and criticized my straightforward attempt to clarify important information as “extraordinarily inappropriate.” I wondered if he was more concerned with protecting his bureaucrat colleague’s reputation and undermining mine than ensuring that correct information was being told to the American public.

Martin Kulldorff, the world-renowned Harvard epidemiologist, posted his reaction on Twitter: “Scott Atlas stated the simple fact that immunity is higher than those with antibodies, whereupon Dr. Fauci criticizes him without contradicting what was actually said. Stating a simple scientific fact is not ‘extraordinarily inappropriate.’ What is going on?”

Scott William Atlas is a senior fellow in health care policy at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution and a former member of the White House Coronavirus Task Force. From 1998 to 2012 he was a professor and chief of neuroradiology at the Stanford University Medical Center.

Horowitz: Why every red state has an obligation to fight hospitals killing patients on ventilators

The family of Sun Ng will definitely have a meaningful Thanksgiving this year thanks to an attorney, a judge, and a doctor who bucked the system and enabled him to get ivermectin when he was at death’s doorstep. Imagine how many thousands of others are missing at this year’s Thanksgiving dinner thanks to the satanic effort to block this lifesaving drug – both outpatient and for those close to death?

Sun Ng, a contractor from Hong Kong, was visiting his grandchildren in October when he caught COVID-19. Ng was admitted to Edward Hospital in Naperville, Illinois, on Oct. 14 and was placed on a ventilator several days later. Like thousands of other patients, the hospital offered Ng no viable hope of survival but bitterly fought the use of ivermectin, even with the family’s own doctor, at their own cost, and with their own liability. Ng’s daughter, Man Kwan Ng, sued the hospital in DuPage County Circuit Court for the right to have Dr. Alan Bain administer a regimen of ivermectin.

According to a court affidavit, at the time Ng was “in the same state for many, many days … critically ill,” and a nurse suggested that Dr. Ng “stop all this aggressive care and let [her father] die naturally.” On November 5, after Ng was on a ventilator for three weeks, DuPage County Circuit Court Judge Paul Fullerton ruled in favor of the family and allowed Dr. Bain to administer 24mg doses of ivermectin from Nov. 8 through Nov. 12. The result? Within five days, he was able to breathe without the ventilator and on Nov. 16 walked out of the ICU. By this past Sunday, Ng was breathing without supplemental oxygen on a regular hospital floor.

Shockingly, the lawyers had to go through five different appearances in this case just to save this man’s life from a hospital that senselessly blocked lifesaving treatment. Originally, the judge dissolved his order because the doctors lied and said the patient was getting better. Then they blocked Dr. Bain from administering the ivermectin because he wasn’t vaccinated. According to reporter Mary Beth Pfeiffer, Judge Fullerton overruled the hospital again because he had testimony from a hospital doctor who estimated that “someone in his condition being on a ventilator like that has a 10 or 15 percent chance of survival.”

Ralph Lorigo, the lawyer on this case, told me that the patient was able to extubate himself from the ventilator, yet the hospital is still appealing the decision! How dare this man live! “You shouldn’t have to have a lawyer to come out alive,” said Lorigo in an interview with TheBlaze.

Shockingly, the hospital attorney, Joseph Monahan, said, “We continue to strenuously object to the false science narrative that is being given to the court without basis.”

Lorigo told me that he has been retained on 129 cases dealing with ivermectin denials, but in the vast majority of them he can’t even complete the court filings before the patient passes away. However, in the cases where he had time to fight it and win in court, he almost always succeeds in saving the patient. “Of all the cases I won and the patient was able to go through the full course of ivermectin, the patient is home and healthy,” declared Lorigo.

Unfortunately, most of these stories don’t have a happy ending thanks to the failure of governors and attorneys general to enforce the law and thanks to obtuse judges. Tarrant County Sheriff’s Deputy Jason Jones is dying of COVID at Texas Health Huguley Hospital in Tarrant County because the hospital has fought tooth and nail to block ivermectin. His wife sued in court and originally won at the district court level, thanks to the help of Lorigo’s law firm. However, when the family was about to get Dr. Mary Bowden to administer the ivermectin, the hospital appealed the decision and got the lower court’s ruling stayed. Emily Miller reported last week that the hospital wrapped a towel around Jason’s feeding tube so that his wife, Erin, couldn’t administer the drug herself.

Where is Gov. Greg Abbott? Where is Attorney General Ken Paxton? Why is the legislature not convening an emergency session to deal with the thousands of people being denied care, while these same hospitals prescribe only three drugs: remdesivir, baricitinib and tofacitinib – all of which either have FDA black box warnings for blood clotting or NIH warnings for kidney failure and liver toxicity. I have had families of patients reach out to me and tell me their loved ones had their bags of vitamins confiscated by the hospital.

Consider the following sickening juxtaposition: Catholic hospitals must now, according to the courts, perform chemical castration at the behest of a patient – even if it’s against their conscience and medical judgement. At the same time, they cannot only deny ivermectin – a Nobel Prize-winning, FDA-approved drug – as the last choice, but actively block the patient from using his own.
There is an immediate need for every attorney general to do battle with these hospitals and every legislature to pass a law specifically barring hospitals from blocking any patient from seeking the use of an FDA-approved drug at the direction of a physician to treat COVID. Hospitals cannot be allowed to become prisons where patients are denied rights they would otherwise have.

https://www.theblaze.com/op-ed/horowitz-why-every-red-state-has-an-obligation-to-fight-hospitals-killing-patients-on-ventilators


There Are Now 365 Studies that Prove the Efficacy of Ivermectin and HCQ in Treating COVID-19 — Will Anyone Confront Fauci and The Medical Elites on Their Deception?

By Jim Hoft November 25, 2021

There have now been 67 Ivermectin COVID-19 controlled studies that show a 67% improvement in COVID patients.

There have been 298 Hydroxychloroquine studies that show a 64% improvement in patients for COVID-19 patients.

Despite the science, Dr. Fauci and the medical elites have blocked the use of these effective treatments for coronavirus patients.

Dr. Robert Malone, the inventor of the mRNA vaccines, accused Dr. Fauci and others of lying and causing the death of over 500,000 Americans by preventing HCQ and Ivermectin, and other treatments from COVID-19 patients.

Dr. Malone is right.  It is well documented that Dr. Fauci and top US doctors conspired to disqualify and condemn hydroxychloroquine as a COVID-19 treatment.


Millions died as a result of this.

As TGP reported earlier — It wasn’t just Fauci but all of the top US medical leaders who were in on the hydroxychloroquine lie.

***For more, click here for TGP’s exclusive interview with Dr. Abraham Zelenko on the benefits of hydroxychloroquine***

Dr. Meryl Nass, MD, broke this story in The Defender. According to Dr. Nass, the top health officials were all in on the conspiracy against hydroxychloroquine.

Fauci runs the NIAID, Collins is the NIH director (nominally Fauci’s boss) and Farrar is director of the Wellcome Trust. Farrar also signed the Lancet letter. And he is chair of the WHO’s R&D Blueprint Scientific Advisory Group, which put him in the driver’s seat of the WHO’s Solidarity trial, in which 1,000 unwitting subjects were overdosed with hydroxychloroquine in order to sink the use of that drug for COVID.

Farrar had worked in Vietnam, where there was lots of malaria, and he had also been involved with SARS-1 there. He additionally was central in setting up the UK Recovery trial, where 1,600 subjects were overdosed with hydroxychloroquine.

Even if Farrar didn’t have some idea of the proper dose of chloroquine drugs from his experience in Vietnam, he, Fauci and Collins would have learned about such overdoses after Brazil told the world about how they mistakenly overdosed patients in a trial of chloroquine for COVID. The revelation was made in an article published in the JAMA in mid-April 2020. Thirty-nine percent of the subjects in Brazil who were given high doses of chloroquine died, average age 50.

Yet the Solidarity and Recovery hydroxychloroquine trials continued into June, stopping only after their extreme doses were exposed.

Fauci made sure to control the treatment guidelines for COVID that came out of the NIAID, advising against both chloroquine drugs and ivermectin. Fauci’s NIAID also cancelled the first large-scale trial of hydroxychloroquine treatment in early disease, after only 20 of the expected 2,000 subjects were enrolled.

What does all this mean?

  1. There was a conspiracy between the five authors of the Nature paper and the heads of the NIH, NIAID and Wellcome Trust to cover up the lab origin of COVID.
  2. There was a conspiracy involving Daszac, Fauci and others to push the natural origin theory. (See other emails in the recent drop.)
  3. There was a conspiracy involving Daszac to write the Lancet letter and hide its provenance, to push the natural origin theory and paint any other ideas as conspiracy theory. Collin’s blog post is another piece of this story.
  4. Farrar was intimately involved in both large hydroxychloroquine overdose trials, in which about 500 subjects total died.
  5. Farrar, Fauci and Collins withheld research funds that could have supported quality trials of the use of chloroquine drugs and ivermectin and other repurposed drugs that might have turned around the pandemic.
  6. Are the four individuals named here — Fauci, Daszak, Collins and Farrar —  intimately involved in the creation of the pandemic, as well as the prolongation and improper treatments used during the pandemic?

Read the rest here.

So when will Dr. Fauci be confronted on his lies that killed millions?

***For more, click here for TGP’s exclusive interview with Dr. Abraham Zelenko on the benefits of hydroxychloroquine***

10 DOCTORS WHO DISCOVERED CANCER ENZYMES IN VACCINES ALL FOUND MURDERED OR ARE MISSING

Biden Predicted Medical Tyranny in 1987 video

https://tv.gab.com/channel/starcrest/view/biden-predicted-medical-tyranny-in-1987-619f226a4dc37d82fa7c8339


Predictable Partisan Hitjob by St. Louis Post-Dispatch on Court’s COVID Ruling

BEN WETMORE on November 24, 2021

  • St. Louis Post-Dispatch left-wing bias evident repeatedly in news article
  • Refers to bureaucrats as creating a ‘scientific consensus’
  • Arrogant Reporter confuses virus with a disease

OUR RATING: Trash Journalism, aka the Daily Beast.

Indicted Outlet: Kurt Erickson | St. Louis Post-Dispatch | Link | Archive | 11/24/21

Reporter Kurt Erickson takes a simple story and, in it, reveals quite a bit about the biases and prejudices that color so much of reporting in general and COVID reporting in particular.

No wonder why so many people distrust the media when its practitioners are so shamelessly biased.

Major Violations:

  • Misrepresentation
  • Opinion as Fact

The first paragraph of this piece was clouded with prejudice that would color the rest of the article: 

“A Missouri judge has stripped local health departments of their ability to issue orders designed to keep people safe during a pandemic.”

The phrase “designed to keep people safe” is both an opinion as to their motives. Here, it is opinion presented as fact. Why were the health orders issued? Some think there is a political motive, some claim that there was a financial motive. The health officials could just be following the social pressure of other bureaucrats and following the herd. The ‘why’ is worthy of its own article, but here the reporter just states it as fact. 

This is extremely irresponsible and sloppy reporting, and we’re not even through the lede. 

“…Judge Daniel Green said all health orders related to the spread of COVID-19 in the state should be lifted because they violate the state constitution’s separation of powers clause affecting the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government.”

This is a technical legal issue, and it’s not explained for the reader as much as its treated as a pretense. They are copying and pasting the verbatim words from the order, but giving zero clarity or context to the issue. Most readers are not going to understand what the separation of powers clause means in this situation. 

It would have been better to have paraphrased the decision to take a complex legal issue and boil it down for the benefit of readers. The court was saying that the proper place for legislation was in the legislature. Letting health officials write laws was a fundamental transformation of our government that needed to be put back in its proper ordering: laws are written by the legislature, carried out by the executive, and disputes about them are handled in the judiciary.

Using a technical, arcane and somewhat esoteric quote does not serve the interests of readers, it mystifies the underlying issues so that only the reporter’s subtle left-wing answers are understandable. It’s as though the reporter puts all of the Judge’s arguments in Greek and presents the dissenting left-wing views in plain English. The reporter is purposefully complicating an issue that deserves clarity and context. 

Erickson’s third paragraph:

“…challenged whether regulations issued by state health officials unconstitutionally authorized local medical directors to issue rules, such as quarantines and business closures to address concerns about the spread of the deadly disease.”

It beggars belief that reporter Erickson is this stupid, but apparently he is. A disease [1] is not a virus. [2][3] Erickson is misusing a word while arrogantly writing about Republicans who he implies do not understand the virus. One simple way to think about it is that even though viruses lead to diseases, the virus is the agent that is causing the symptoms. The disease is the presented illness. 

Since COVID is 40-50% non-symptomatic, [4] meaning that it presents no disease, the spread of COVID is really about stopping the spread of the virus, not stopping the ‘deadly disease’.  

As well, the COVID disease is far from “deadly” and is, in fact, one of the mildest viruses in recent years. The challenge with COVID is that its transmissibility is very high, meaning that it spreads easily. It’s high transmissibility is most responsible for the human cost of 774,580 dead. [5

Though many of the COVID fatalities are contested, and controversy exists about whether COVID’s fatality is significantly lower than what is reported due to political motives. [6][7]

The key term is the Infection Fatality Rate (IFR). It can be hard to distinguish such terms, as the two medical terms Case Fatality Rate (CFR) and Infection Fatality Rate (IFR) can appear similar, but in reality the CFR is derived from cases whereas the IFR metric comes from estimates of infections. Since COVID does not present symptoms in nearly half of those infected, the CFR may appear high, even though the IFR may be low. [8

Fourth paragraph:

“It cites scientific consensus from federal, state and local public health officials that masks are necessary to limit the spread of COVID-19 until more people are vaccinated.”

lol. Notice the sleight of hand here: ‘scientific consensus’ from ‘public health officials’ aka politicians and bureaucrats. One wonders what other ‘scientific consensus’ that bureaucrats have. If you asked them if tax increases were tied to public health, they would probably agree. If you asked them if doubling state employee pensions would result in better public health, they would likely agree.

Politicians and bureaucrats are not capable of creating ‘scientific consensus.’ This is a major misrepresentation

And even if these weren’t the consensus of bureaucrats, the reporter is also completely ignoring the significant medical skepticism of the efficacy of masking, [9] and also the significant medical questions about whether vaccinations are actually limiting, or only partially limiting, the spread of COVID. [10

A spokesman for Attorney General Eric Schmitt, a Republican candidate for U.S. Senate who has gone to court to fight health orders, signaled the case would not be appealed.

Schmitt’s partisan and candidate status isn’t relevant, but included to further a narrative of Republicans-dont-take-COVID-seriously. It’s a form of guilt by association here. It’s meant to provide the reader with “oh, clearly he did this, because he’s running for office and appealing to those evil Republican primary voters.” 

There’s no other reason to include it. The Judge in this case, Judge Daniel Green, is also a Republican. [11] He just recently won re-election as a Republican in 2020. [12] He came to this conclusion even though he’s not currently running for re-election, but somehow that escapes mention in the article.

Standards are standards only if they’re consistently applied. When they’re not consistently applied, it’s usually to further the underlying biases of the reporter and outlet. 

Presuming that bias is unfair to any outlet, but in this case we have 40 years of editorial endorsements for Democrat Presidential candidates by the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, so it’s not really a presumption after a generation of solidly left-wing endorsements. [13

Brown, who is now running for a seat in the state Senate, said the orders were an example of “tyranny.”

This is a use of “scare quotes” to indicate mocking derision for a quote. It’s a violation of any pretense of objectivity by the reporter. The person mentioned, Ben Brown who owns the bar which sued to undo the regulations, may indeed feel as though the regulations are tyrannical. There’s no need for scare quotes except to signal to the reader that it’s an exaggeration. 

Here’s our revision without the scare quotes:

Brown, who is now running for a seat in the state Senate, said the orders were an example of tyranny.

That paraphrasing of his comments exists without the cynicism, snark, and obvious left-wing bias evident in most reporters for legacy corporate media outlets. 

Overall this article is filled with partisan sniping, bias, and major mistakes. 

OUR RATING: Trash Journalism, aka the Daily Beast.

Bibliography:

1 ] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/disease
2 ] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/virus
3 ] https://grammar.yourdictionary.com/vs/disease-vs-virus-what-is-the-difference.html

4 ] https://www.uchealth.org/today/the-truth-about-asymptomatic-spread-of-covid-19/

5 ] https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/us/covid-cases.html
6 ] https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/county-finds-overcounted-covid-19-deaths-25-percent
7 ] https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/09/fox-news-rick-leventhal-confirms-prior-reporting-94-covid-19-deaths-average-2-3-potential-causes-death/
8 ] https://ourworldindata.org/mortality-risk-covid
9 ] https://www.acsh.org/news/2021/08/24/fact-checking-fact-checkers-what-do-studies-say-about-masks-and-covid-19-15754
10 ] https://www.cnbc.com/2021/07/23/delta-variant-pfizer-covid-vaccine-39percent-effective-in-israel-prevents-severe-illness.html
11 ] https://ballotpedia.org/Daniel_Green
12 ] https://krcgtv.com/news/local/cole-county-circuit-judge-daniel-green-seeking-re-election
13 ] https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/st-louis-post-dispatch/

Yesterday’s Conspiracy Is Today’s Medical Journal Headline: NEJM Explains How COVID Vaccines May Produce Spike Proteins that Lead to Myocarditis

By Jim Hoft November 26, 2021`

NEJM image – Figure 1. Anti-idiotype Antibodies and SARS-CoV-2.

For several weeks “fringe” doctors have argued that the spike proteins produced by the COVID-19 vaccines may result in numerous deaths this winter season.

Now, weeks later, the New England Journal of Medicine is suggesting a similar situation.  The spike proteins produced by the COVID-19 vaccines may lead to myocarditis and neurological concerns.

Alex Berenson reported:

Downstream effects of the antibodies that people produce against the coronavirus spike protein may lead to myocarditis and even neurological concerns, two veteran medical researchers have written in the top medical journal in the United States.

TRENDING: All Four Botswana “Nu” Variant Patients Were Fully Vaccinated

Our immune systems produce these antibodies in response to both vaccination and natural infection with Covid. However – though the researchers do not say so explicitly, possibly because doing so would be politically untenable – spike protein antibody levels are MUCH higher following vaccination than infection. Thus the downstream response to vaccination may be more severe.

The NEJM published the short paper Wednesday in its Basic Implications of Clinical Observations series. One of the writers is an oncologist and professor at Harvard Medical School; the other is a cancer researcher who has his own lab at the University of California, Davis.

Here is the NEJM report — A Possible Role for Anti-idiotype Antibodies in SARS-CoV-2 Infection and Vaccination



Related

https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/circ.144.suppl_1.10712

https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2021/11/25/unvax-tax-expert-proposes-monthly-fines-for-the-unvaccinated/

https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2021/11/24/delingpole-australian-army-puts-covid-19-close-contacts-into-quarantine-camps/

How the Pilgrims suffered until they adopted private property rights – Thanksgiving Meals to Nebraska Veterans: ‘It Means a Lot’- Capitalism is the Ultimate Form of Humanism

By Hans Bader How the Pilgrims suffered until they adopted private property rightsImage: GDJ/Pixabay

“Today is Thanksgiving, and there is much to be thankful. One lesson of the holiday that we should try not to forget is how the Pilgrims were saved from starvation and misery by adopting a system of private property rights,” notes law professor Ilya Somin in the Washington Post.

The Pilgrims’ reversal of fortune is described by economist Benjamin Powell:

Many people believe that after suffering through a severe winter, the Pilgrims’ food shortages were resolved the following spring when the Native Americans taught them to plant corn and a Thanksgiving celebration resulted. In fact, the pilgrims continued to face chronic food shortages for three years until the harvest of 1623. Bad weather or lack of farming knowledge did not cause the pilgrims’ shortages. Bad economic incentives did.

In 1620 Plymouth Plantation was founded with a system of communal property rights. Food and supplies were held in common and then distributed based on equality and need as determined by Plantation officials. People received the same rations whether or not they contributed to producing the food, and residents were forbidden from producing their own food. Governor William Bradford, in his 1647 history, Of Plymouth Plantation, wrote that this system was found to breed much confusion and discontent and retard much employment that would have been to their benefit and comfort. The problem was that “young men, that were most able and fit for labour, did repine that they should spend their time and strength to work for other men’s wives and children without any recompense.” Because of the poor incentives, little food was produced.

Faced with potential starvation in the spring of 1623, the colony decided to implement a new economic system. Every family was assigned a private parcel of land. They could then keep all they grew for themselves….

This change, Bradford wrote, had very good success, for it made all hands very industrious, so as much more corn was planted than otherwise would have been. Giving people economic incentives changed their behavior….

Once the Pilgrims in the Plymouth Plantation abandoned their communal economic system and adopted one with greater individual property rights, they never again faced the starvation and food shortages of the first three years.

A 1999 article by the Hoover Institution’s Tom Bethell provides a more detailed account.

Gary Sinise Gifts Thanksgiving Meals to Nebraska Veterans: ‘It Means a Lot’

Actor Gary Sinise looks on before an NBA basketball game between the Washington Wizards and the Dallas Mavericks, Saturday, Dec. 12, 2015, in Dallas. (AP Photo/Jim Cowsert)
AP Photo/Jim Cowsert

NICK GILBERTSON 25 Nov 2021

Actor Gary Sinise, who played double-amputee Lt. Dan in Robert Zemeckis’s 1994 film Forrest Gump, donated Thanksgiving meals to veterans at a VA campus in Lincoln, Nebraska.

Sinise ensured 78 veterans living at the Victory Park apartment complex received a Thanksgiving meal on Wednesday, the Lincoln Journal Star reports. Veterans ranged from the age of 22-74 and served in several different conflicts and wars.

Though Sinise was not in attendance for the festivities, veterans were grateful for his thoughtful offering, according to Property Manager Samantha Garcia.

“It means a lot that he is recognizing them. They sometimes feel forgotten, especially as they get older,” she said, per the Lincoln Journal Star. “With Gary being active with veterans himself, it means a lot coming from him.”

Emil Jacobson serves in the U.S. Air Force and volunteered to help out in Lincoln on Wednesday, according to NTV.

“I myself am in the service, I just feel like its really important to give back to those who come before us and pay homage and help these guys out,” Jacobson said.

“It’s very important, especially with all of the Holidays coming up we have to make sure everyone knows we are here for each other,” Jacobsen added. 

Hy-Vee catered the meals which were served to the veterans by Gold Star Mothers and Blue Star Mothers.

“It’s so important to remember that these people are here and remember what they’ve done for us,” Garcia said, per the Lincoln Journal Star. 

Sinise also donated meals to veterans who reside at a VA in Omaha, NTV reports.

The Apollo 13 star has a long history of assisting veterans. His nonprofit, The Gary Sinise Foundation, recently provided a marine, who was severely wounded in Afghanistan, with a smart home, Breitbart News reported.

“At the Gary Sinise Foundation, we serve our nation by honoring our defenders, veterans, first responders, their families, and those in need,” the foundation’s mission statement reads. “We do this by creating and supporting unique programs designed to entertain, educate, inspire, strengthen, and build communities.”

https://www.breitbart.com/entertainment/2021/11/25/actor-gary-sinise-gifts-thanksgiving-meals-to-nebraska-veterans/


Doug Ross: Capitalism is the Ultimate Form of Humanism

By Joe Hoft November 26, 2021

Doug Ross released another great read from the Private Journal of Doug Ross.  This one explains the difference between capitalism and communism from a simple and yet powerful perspective.

The Private Journal of Doug Ross shared a post with me yesterday on Thanksgiving that was outstanding, so decided to share in part here:

Ross shares about parenthood and how our children love to be affirmed.  This in innate in our nature:

You’ll find that your child seeks, no… craves, attention, affirmation and connection with other human beings.

At 14 months, your child wants to hear your applause as an unsteady stumble turns into a first unassisted walk.

At 10 years old, your child will be on the diving board at the local pool waving arms and shouting, “Look at me, Mom! Look at me!”

At 24, your child will beam as you congratulate them on their first promotion at work.

Human beings desire attention, confirmation and validation from other humans, from their earliest days to their last.

Next Ross notes that capitalism is humanism where efforts are recognized.

Capitalism has succeeded where all other economic arrangements have failed because it recognizes the basic needs of humanity.

Someone who has masterful woodworking skills can secure a living creating cabinetry and custom furniture. They enjoy the beauty of their creations and simultaneously the kudos they receive.

“Look at me, Mom!”

Another person might find a special talent in computer programming, another in writing books, and still another in plumbing and HVAC.

Then Ross compares capitalism to Marxism and it’s clear why the latter fails:

Marxism rejects the unique human need for attention, recognition and achievement.

Each individual is unique in G-d’s eyes. Marxism rejects individuality and places control in the hands of a planning elite that can never organize individuals as well as they can organize themselves.

“Look at me, Mom!”

Marxism tells the 10-year old on the diving board to shut up, get off the diving board and follow orders.

Marxism is an anti-human system of government and should be treated as a poison among all educated peoples.

What an excellent analysis.  Well done Mr. Ross.

The True Story Of The First Thanksgiving

  • John Eidson November 25, 2021

[Millions of school children have been taught the revisionist history that the first Thanksgiving was about the Pilgrims giving thanks to their Indian neighbors for saving them from starvation. Around this time of year, an historically accurate account of the first Thanksgiving was told on national radio. A few years ago, I compiled a lightly-edited transcript of that account, which appears below. Please enjoy and share “The True Story of the First Thanksgiving,” as it was narrated each November by the late nationally-syndicated radio host, Rush Limbaugh.]

The story of the Pilgrims began in the early part of the seventeenth century. The Church of England under King James I was persecuting anyone who did not recognize its absolute authority. Those who demanded freedom of worship were hunted down, imprisoned, and sometimes executed for their beliefs. A small group of separatists fled to Holland, where they established an outpost.

A decade later, about forty of the separatists decided to embark on a perilous journey to the New World, where they could live and worship God according to the dictates of their own conscience. On August 1, 1620, the Mayflower set sail from Plymouth, England carrying a total of 102 passengers, including forty Pilgrims led by William Bradford. On the journey, Bradford set up a contract that established laws that would govern the new settlement. The values and principles set forth in the Mayflower Compact were derived from the Bible.

Because of an unshakable belief in Divine Providence, the Pilgrims never doubted that their bold experiment would succeed. But their journey to the New World was long and arduous. When they landed in America, they found, according to Bradford’s detailed journal, a cold and desolate wilderness. There were no friends to greet them, he wrote, or houses to shelter them. There were no inns where they could find temporary lodging and no trading posts where they could buy food and other necessities. The numerous hardships they would encounter in the name of religious freedom were just beginning.

During the first winter, half of the Pilgrims, including Bradford’s wife, perished from starvation, sickness or exposure. When spring came, Indians taught the settlers how to plant corn, fish for cod and skin beavers for coats. Life improved on the margins, but the colony was still a long way from assured survival.

The original contract the Pilgrims entered into with their merchant sponsors in London called for everything they produced to go into a common store, with each member of the settlement entitled to one common share. All land they cleared and all houses they built belonged to the community. The plan was to distribute everything equally. No colony member owned anything beyond a proportionate share of the common output. Under this communal living arrangement, the colony’s most industrious members lacked incentive to produce as much as they could.     

Soon, it became obvious that the collectivist system was not yielding enough food. Faced with mass starvation, Bradford decided on bold action, and assigned each family its own plot of land. With private property rights and personal incentive in play, food production began to soar. The Pilgrims scrapped the collectivist system that almost led to their demise. What Bradford wrote about the colony’s near-disastrous experiment in communal living should be taught to every child in America:

“…. this community was found to breed much confusion and discontent, and to retard much employment that would otherwise have been to its benefit and comfort. Young men that were most able and fit for labor and service did repine [complain] that they should spend their time and strength to work for other men’s wives and children without compensation.” 

Under the new arrangement, every family was permitted to sell its excess crops and other products. The result? “This had very good success,” wrote Bradford, “for it made all hands industrious, so more corn was planted than otherwise would have been.”  

With an abundance of food at hand, the Pilgrims set up trading posts and began to exchange goods with the Indians. The profits they earned enabled them to pay off their debts to their sponsors. News of the settlement’s prosperity attracted other Europeans, and precipitated what came to be known as The Great Puritan Migration.   

Many of America’s schools incorrectly teach that the first Thanksgiving was an occasion where grateful Pilgrims thanked the Indians for saving them from starvation. But the true story of Thanksgiving is that of William Bradford giving thanks not to the Indians, but to God for the guidance and inspiration to establish a thriving colony, one that enabled the Pilgrims to generously share their plentiful bounty with their Indian neighbors at that first Thanksgiving.       

Omitted in many classrooms is the historical fact that it was not Indians who saved the Pilgrims. Rather, it was free enterprise capitalism and Scripture, the latter of which was acknowledged on October 3, 1789 by America’s first president in his Thanksgiving Proclamation, a short historical document that every school child should read.

By John Eidson

A 1968 electrical engineering graduate of Georgia Teach and now retired, John Eidson is a freelance writer in Atlanta and a regular contributor to The Blue State Conservative.

Image by GDJ at Pixabay.

Related

Thanksgiving Proclamation, 3 October 1789

John L. Kachelman, Jr.: The Reality and Requisite of a National Thanksgiving

By Joe Hoft November 25, 2021

Guest post by John L. Kachelman, Jr.

The Reality and Requisite of a National Thanksgiving

The fourth Thursday in November is my favorite day of the year. It is “Thanksgiving Day.” Ironically my favorite day of the year follows my least favorite day (Halloween). Thanksgiving Day celebrates the heartfelt and happy acknowledgment that the Almighty God has providentially blessed us. Halloween celebrates all that is evil, selfish and ungodly. These two calendar events frame the constant battle in civilization’s history. I prefer the celebration of good rather than the celebration of evil.

One has well asked, “Why is it that mankind chooses to celebrate thanksgiving to the Almighty only on one day, and focus on gripes, grumbles, and complaints the remaining 364 days?” The answer to this query is an indictment of society—mankind is more concerned with self than with the Almighty God.

A celebration of Thanksgiving is a high-valued target in today’s ungodly society. Any action, celebration, moral compass, lifestyle choices, etc, that places the Judeo-Christian ethos as the governing parameters, is instantly damned in brutal verbiage. To acknowledge Thanksgiving is to acknowledge the Almighty God. In today’s culture, God is not acknowledged—He is erased.

The practical consequence of erasing God is an embracing of socialism. Socialism advocates that communal thought is the source of all power; the State is the ultimate arbitrator in even the most personal choices. One is thankful to the State because God is erased. Such an ungodly position ultimately leads to blind submission: “The State knows better how to spend the private citizen’s money than the private citizens.” Or, “The State knows better what your children need to learn.” Or, “The State knows better how to raise your children—it takes a village to raise a child because parents cannot raise their own children!” This is a power struggle—the power of evil seeks to erase the power of good.

However, there is a major problem in the socialistic erasure of the Almighty God. The prophet summarizes this issue as he describes the socio-religious conditions of his day, “There is oath-taking, denial, murder, stealing, and adultery. They employ violence, so that bloodshed follows bloodshed. Therefore, the land mourns, and everyone who lives in it languishes along with the animals of the field and the birds of the sky, and even the fish of the sea disappear.” And what is the cause of this catastrophic environment? “For there is no faithfulness, nor loyalty, nor knowledge of God in the land” (Hosea 4:1-3).

Please do not miss the obvious truth! The failure to be thankful to the Almighty God impacts every aspect of man’s civilization and environment. Even the “ecosystem” is destroyed by the unthankful attitude toward the Almighty God! Do you want to cure the ecosystem’s disintegration (climate change or global warming or whatever it is termed today)? Then foster a thankful attitude toward the Almighty God. Do you want to cure the criminal cancers destroying civility? Then cultivate a knowledge that will cause you to be thankful to the Almighty God. Then cultivate a knowledge that leads to a thankful attitude. It is a simple fix. But this simple fix is fought “tooth-and-nail” by the unthankful heart.

The conscience and strength of our nation is being dismantled brick by brick. The deconstruction of our nation has already removed much of our heritage that made us a world power. The heroes have been painted as the villains and the personalities that have fueled hate and instigated anger are memorialized as “saints” and recently even as the Christ!

Reliance on God’s providence was a hallmark of the early colonists but is a never taught historical fact in our schools. God’s providence is a blasphemous belief according to our politically correct speech. God’s providence is a faded memory in the minds of older Americans. The Judeo-Christian foundation of our morality, governing, and freedoms are being attacked and removed piece by piece. We have lost so much of our national conscience that Hosea’s characterization of his society reads like today’s news briefs.

Our nation has long been in an ideological war. Many dismissed the surrender of freedoms and the encroaching governmental “mandates” as inconsequential. But, ideas have consequences. When ungodly, uncivil ideas are permitted unrestricted advocacy, they become a cancer that metastases and brings ruin to every part of society.

Our national day of “Thanksgiving” brings an uncomfortable focus to this war. Two striking points are considered as illustrative of those intent on dismantling our great Republic who attack Thanksgiving Day.

First, there is an effort to rewrite history so the Pilgrim’s first Thanksgiving becomes a myth. Illustrating this are a number of articles from those claiming to have “discovered the truth” regarding the Thanksgiving holiday celebrated in the USA.

Our educational centers are teaching the “inventing” of Thanksgiving. The holiday is purported to be founded upon a legend. Here is one of many such propaganda pieces deconstructing our national heritage, revising our history and contorting truth. All is an effort to erase the Almighty God and encourage the State’s surrender to socialism.

“The legend of the American Thanksgiving holiday is said to have been based on a feast of thanksgiving in the early days of the American colonies almost 400 years ago. The tale as it is told in grade schools is a legend, a mythologized version that downplays some of the bleaker history of how Thanksgiving became an American national holiday…The holiday continued…not with a feast and family, but rather with rowdy drunken men who went door to door begging for treats. That’s how many of the original American holidays were celebrated: Christmas, New Year’s Eve and Day, Washington’s birthday, the 4th of July…By the mid-18th century, the rowdy behavior had become a carnivalesque misrule that was closer to what we think of as Halloween or Mardi Gras today. An established mummer’s parade made up of cross-dressing men, known as the Fantasticals, began by the 1780s: it was considered a more acceptable behavior than the drunken rowdiness. It could be said that these two institutions are still part of Thanksgiving Day celebrations: rowdy men (Thanksgiving Day football games, established in 1876), and elaborate mummer parades (Macy’s Parade, established in 1924).”

In stark contrast to the idiocy of the revisionist’s attempts to rewrite facts regarding documented facts, we note this historical account:

“In 1621, the Plymouth colonists and the Wampanoag shared an autumn harvest feast that is acknowledged today as one of the first Thanksgiving celebrations in the colonies…In September 1620, a small ship called the Mayflower left Plymouth, England, carrying 102 passengers—an assortment of religious separatists seeking a new home where they could freely practice their faith…Only half of the Mayflower’s original passengers and crew lived to see their first New England spring. In March, the remaining settlers moved ashore, where they received an astonishing visit from a member of the Abenaki tribe who greeted them in English. Several days later, he returned with another Native American, Squanto, a member of the Pawtuxet tribe…Squanto taught the Pilgrims how to cultivate corn, extract sap from maple trees, catch fish in the rivers and avoid poisonous plants. He also helped the settlers forge an alliance with the Wampanoag, a local tribe, which would endure for more than 50 years…In November 1621, after the Pilgrims’ first corn harvest proved successful, Governor William Bradford organized a celebratory feast and invited a group of the fledgling colony’s Native American allies, including the Wampanoag chief Massasoit. Now remembered as American’s “first Thanksgiving.”

Much of what we know about what happened at the first Thanksgiving comes from Pilgrim chronicler Edward Winslow, who wrote:

“Our harvest being gotten in…we might after a special manner rejoice together, after we had gathered the fruits of our labors…many of the Indians coming amongst us, and amongst the rest their greatest king Massasoit, with some ninety men, whom for three days we entertained and feasted…And although it be not always so plentiful, as it was at this time with us, yet by the goodness of God, we are so far from want.”

The second point focuses upon how the real Thanksgiving Day celebration demolishes the socialistic onslaught of our free entrepreneurial economy. This point is often eclipsed by the feast shared between the Pilgrims and the Native Americans, but it should be strongly emphasized today.

The first Thanksgiving exposes socialism as bereft of any value culturally, morally, civically, economically, and religiously! Any way one looks at socialism it is worthless—except to the elite who become richer and more aloof!

Let me suggest that you read several articles published in Forbes Magazine by Jerry Bowyer. Bowyer’s discussion on the real significance of Thanksgiving is rarely heard. His opening sentences read: “It’s wrong to say that American was founded by capitalists. In fact, America was founded by socialists who had the humility to learn from their initial mistakes and embrace freedom.”

Bowyer, in another article, exposes the emptiness of socialism’s promises. Socialism never produces abundance, energy, expansion, and improvements. As Bowyer notes, “I explained that the first Thanksgiving was a celebration of abundance after a period of socialism and starvation…Their Thanksgiving celebrated the triumph of the individual, private property, and incentive, over collectivism…For them, God, not Plato, knew best. Accepting the principles of private property and self-interest was God’s way of harnessing self-interest to the greater good. We know all of this because an elder and Governor of the Plymouth plantation, William Bradford, kept a journal and it survives today.” 

I appreciate such insight!

Thanksgiving Day is exceptional in many ways but these two points add emphasis to the reality of such a day celebrated in history and its requisite to a national ideology that succeeds by a bold individualism and a contained and controlled central governing!

The Bible says, “Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord” (Psalm 33:12). Perhaps we should add the thought “and whose citizenry remains thankful for the divine blessings.” The Bible says in Deuteronomy 28 that if we honor and obey God, we will enjoy blessings. If a nation dishonors and disobeys Him, it will reap curses (as Hosea observed).

I well remember the truisms once stressed by our political leaders: “If we ever forget that we are One Nation Under God, then we will be a nation gone under.” And, “Once a nation removes God from its conscience, it becomes a god-less nation.”

This is the reality and requisite of our Thanksgiving Day!

VIDEO The Waukesha slaughter and plague of black racism – Ahmaud Arbery’s Father Declares ‘All Lives Matter’ – Belief that America is structured to undermine the lives of black Americans will hold us back

Scott Lively challenges Christians swept up in the BLM ‘revenge cult’

I’m half French and half English, a typical European, white, male baby boomer, but I’ve always considered myself a “white equalist” because I believe the Bible’s teaching in Galatians 3:28 and Colossians 3:11 that all people are equal in Christ.

As an American, I’ve always been proud that the founders included “all men are created equal” as the first “self evident truth” in the preamble of the Declaration of Independence. To me, and to all the white patriots I have ever known, that is the true foundation and aspiration of this nation notwithstanding the failure of many to live up to it over the years.

As an 11th generation Bay Stater (descendant of Roger Conant who arrived in Plymouth in 1624), I’ve always been proud that my home state of Massachusetts was the main incubator of the abolitionist movement against slavery, and that some of the most powerful opponents of slavery were the early U.S. presidents from Massachusetts, particularly John Adams and John Quincy Adams who served as counsel for the defense of the rebel slaves on the La Amistad, and once wrote, poetically: “Roll, years of promise, rapidly roll round, till not a slave shall on this earth be found.”

As a pastor, I have devoted a significant part of my life to fighting racism by promoting racial harmony. In 2008 my wife and I moved into the 70-80% black (20-25% Puerto Rican) inner-city of Springfield, Massachusetts, and bought an abandoned crack house in the heart of one of the worst neighborhoods to live in and restore with our own hands as an example of “redemptive living.” We risked our lives to share the Gospel with people in that neighborhood, where there was a gang shooting on our corner the very day we took possession of the house and where I saw a stabbing one day from our upstairs window.

Together with my black ministry partner and great friend Pastor C.S. Cooley, I founded the Redemption Gate Mission to serve the bottom strata of inner-city society. Our Holy Grounds Coffee House church became the leading model of racial harmony in western Massachusetts. When none of those good works proved sufficient to stop the left from trying to destroy me for opposing the LGBT political agenda, part of my self-defense was running for governor in 2014 as an Independent. My choice for running mate in that race was Shelly Saunders, a black (then) homeless grandmother who now manages Holy Grounds under Pastor Cooley’s supervision.

TRENDING: So it begins: FBI raids home of mom who protested school board

Why the attacks by the LGBTs? I was, among other things, a co-founder in 2007 with black former football star Ken Hutcherson, of Watchman on the Walls, an international coalition against “gay marriage.” I’ve also served as a short-term pro-family missionary to Africans in both Uganda and Kenya on three occasions, and shared the realization all such missionaries come to about the surprising sweetness of personality that is typical of native Africans untainted by western liberalism.

All this is not self-aggrandizement (because all glory goes to God for any good thing in this former addict/alcoholic) but is simply a front-loaded self-defense to the inevitable charge of “racism” that the left will level against me for writing this article.

I will not pull any punches here. To the eternal shame of the so-called “liberals” who have exploited black suffering past and present for their own financial enrichment and political power, what has become the public face of “blackness” since at least Ferguson is brutal thuggery and irrational hate. It has been justified and rationalized by the false narrative of “white supremacy” (perfected by the vipers at the SPLC) and exacerbated by constant, cruel agitation by the pot-stirring leftist media and self-serving politicians.

At every turn the Marxist wormtongues have whispered malicious mischaracterizations in black ears of every police shooting (however necessary or justified they may have been), while spinning enticing revenge fantasies (now fact) of consequence-free retaliation, gilded with the potential of exacting “reparations” payoffs as tribute.

The progression of that campaign to foment and escalate race-war from one cluster of violent rioting to the next scored pay-dirt in 2020. But now it has culminated in perhaps the most horrific race-based hate crime of the modern era in Waukesha, Wisconsin, Sunday. We don’t know all the details, but we know enough to say enough is enough and to start holding the liars and agitators accountable for their incitement to mayhem and murder.

But it’s also time to hold the black racists accountable for what they have allowed themselves to become, while remembering that the defense of entrapment (both legally and morally) is only available to those who were not already inclined to do the crimes they stand charged with.

I know the black community well enough to say that a huge percentage are Christians, but a shamefully large number of these fellow believers have been swept up in the Black Lives Matter revenge cult. As I have said all along, black lives matter very much, but the movement called “Black Lives Matter,” launched by two openly Marxist lesbians, exists solely to wage race war in furtherance of the Marxist assault on Judeo-Christian civilization. Christians should have nothing to do with it! “Have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness but rather expose them,” writes Paul in Ephesians 5:11.

I’ll put it more bluntly. If Jesus Christ could and did forgive those who tortured and murdered Him, and who commanded us in the Lord’s Prayer to “forgive those who have trespassed against us” as a condition of being forgiven ourselves, what possible justification can any Christian have for seeking revenge for trespasses against our ancestors or strangers who were shot by the police?

I have nothing to say to the genuine Marxists whose reprobate minds literally cannot perceive truth. I will pray for their redemption while working to purge them from all seats of power and influence in the culture.

But to black Christians I say stop picking the scabs of past racial injustice and let the wounds heal. Step up to your responsibility. YOU should be the main advocates for a color blind society because that is what Jesus advocates. If enough of you do so, loudly enough, perhaps you can end this plague of black racism sweeping through our nation. They’re certainly not going to accept it from a white guy.

Watch – Ahmaud Arbery’s Father Declares ‘All Lives Matter’ After Guilty Verdict in Son’s Murder

Ahmaud Arbery's father, Marcus Aubrey, center, walks away from the Glynn County Courthouse, Thursday, June 4, 2020, during a recess in the preliminary hearing of Travis McMichael, Gregory McMichael and William Bryan, in Brunswick, Ga. The three men are accused of shooting his son while he ran through their neighborhood …
AP Photo/Stephen B. Morton

PAUL BOIS 24 Nov 2021

The father of Ahmaud Arbery declared “all lives matter” shortly after a jury found Travis McMichael, Gregory McMichael, and William Bryan “guilty” of the murder of his son.

Speaking on the steps of the courthouse on Wednesday afternoon, Marcus Arbery said that his son’s murder should not happen to anyone, be they black or white.

“For real, all lives matter,” Arbery said as the crowd, including Rev. Al Sharpton, nodded in agreement. “Not just black children, we don’t want to see nobody go through this.” He went on to say:

I don’t want to see no daddy to watch his kid get shot down like that. It’s all our problem. So let’s keep fighting. Let’s keep doing it and making this a better place for all human beings. All human beings. Love everybody! All human beings need to be treated equally. Today is a good day.

As Joel Pollack noted earlier, the family of Ahmaud Arbery has steered clear of divisive politics throughout the aftermath of his murder, having previously met with former President Trump and even granting interviews with Breitbart News.

“Though the trial became racially and politically charged, it was not so initially; the Arbery family’s attorney, Lee Merritt, spoke frequently with Breitbart News and acknowledged that then-President Donald Trump had been helpful in the case,” noted Pollack.

In June of last year, Arbery’s mother, Wanda Cooper-Jones, publicly appreciated the compassion and concern former President Trump showed her family and to other families in similar circumstances.

“I was very, very emotional throughout the whole conference,” she told Fox News after Trump signed his executive order on police reform. “[Trump] was very compassionate. He showed major concern for all families. Not just one family, but for all families.”

“I can say that President Trump was very receiving. He listened and he addressed each and every family accordingly,” she added.

President Trump later tweeted that Arbery’s mother is “A GREAT woman.”

“A GREAT woman. Her son is looking down from heaven & is very proud of his wonderful & loving mom!!!” he tweeted.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/11/24/watch-ahmaud-arberys-father-declares-all-lives-matter-after-guilty-verdict-in-sons-murder/

Anti-Woke Black Leader: ‘Post-Racial’ America Starts with Two-Parent Black Families

Kendall A. Qualls
Facebook/Kendall A. Qualls

DR. SUSAN BERRY 24 Nov 2021

An anti-woke black leader denounced the pervasion of racial identity in the country’s culture and urged Americans to achieve a “post-racial” state by encouraging a return to two-parent black families.

At an event sponsored in early November by the Liberty Classical Academy, Minnesota-based TakeCharge President Kendall Qualls addressed the issue of “Envisioning a Post Racial America,” and moving the nation beyond its current laser focus on racial identity.

Qualls, who speaks out regularly against Critical Race Theory, observed that on the day Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. was assassinated, he was five years old, and “at that time, nearly 80 percent of black children were born in two-parent families”:

In my lifetime, we have seen the black community transformed from 80 percent two-parent families to 80 percent fatherless homes, without one national initiative to reverse the trend. If the American black family was a spotted owl or grey wolf, it would be on the endangered species list. There would be a national campaign to save the black family. There’d be galas, commercials, bumper stickers … My friends, what has happened in the black community is nothing short of a cultural genocide, and it’s the cause of 90 percent of the problems that we face in our communities. Not the mystical systemic racism. This is not the dream that Martin Luther King had in mind, and it’s been a nightmare for children. born during this time. We have been used as political pawns for 50 years and it ends tonight

The black leader noted to his audience that, while Americans are today “bombarded with messages, that the country is overflowing with white supremacy, systemic racism,” the truth is “we’re actually living in the least racist period in our country’s history:”

But if you listen exclusively to news media, the entertainment industry and what I like to call the academic industrial complex, you would never know the real truth. That this is the least racist period in our country’s history in one of the least racist countries in the world. So having lived through the Jim Crow South, my parents and grandparents would have loved to have grown up in the America that I grew up in.

Qualls explained that, even within his own family of origin, a great contrast exists in the lives of his and his wife’s children and those of some of his siblings:

My children are the only ones that grew up with both a mother and a father in the home. Half their cousins have never finished high school. None have gone on to college. Half my nephews have been incarcerated. My nieces are mothers of children, having never been married. So, how do we explain these differences? Was the systemic racism built into American society? Or was it something else? Well, here you have two tales from the same family, same skin color, yet the disparities are quite broad.

Qualls said that, while he grew up first in Harlem in New York City, and then in a trailer park in Oklahoma, where he was often called “ghetto kid” and “trailer trash,” he was motivated to get an education, which he called “the great equalizer.”

Ultimately, he began a marketing career in the healthcare industry, where, at 36 years old, he became responsible for a $94 million budget.

“Trust me, I tell people all the time, I’m no one exceptional,” Qualls told his audience. “I live in an exceptional country. And I serve an exceptional God. A story like mine can happen … only in America, but it’s happened to millions of people in this country.”

He said his experience is a stark example of how America has changed:

I know what systemic racism is. My parents and grandparents lived through systemic racism. I did not. Over the course of my life … I received help from people, personally and professionally, that didn’t look like me. I received help from people who were black and white, rich and poor, male and female, from all over the country. They helped out of the goodness of their hearts. How do I know that? Because I had nothing to give them … Americans routinely help people who are trying to better their lot in life, and they don’t put a racial filter on it.

“If you look for racism in this country, you’ll find it,” Qualls emphasized. “But if you look for opportunity, you’ll find it 100 times over.”

He invited his audience to observe that many native-born black Americans are “blinded by the tears of anger, mistrust, and misunderstanding,” in contrast to the black Americans who have legally immigrated to the United States from the Caribbean Islands and African nations such as Nigeria.

“They earn significantly more than native born black Americans,” Qualls explained. “They achieve higher levels of education. And they are living the American Dream that civil rights leaders desired for us.”

“Many of these new citizens came to the country with intact families, which helped them with achievement and integration,” he added. “But another reason they’ve had success is they haven’t been indoctrinated by years of anti-white, anti-American, and anti-capitalist hatred.”

Qualls urged black Americans to “reconcile with the sins of our nation, re-establish two-parent families, rebuild our culture, and join other Americans around the table of prosperity as fellow citizens of this great country.”

He recommended black Americans begin this transformation by “tapping into the strength of our cultural roots of the black culture, which is linked to our Christian faith”:

Forgiveness is the cornerstone for Christianity. Just as God extends forgiveness to us in Christ, we are called to forgive others. As we take steps to forgive our country for the sins of slavery, Jim Crow laws, and many other forms of bigotry that followed, the heavy burden of bitterness, anger, resentment will be lifted from our shoulders. Our eyes will be open to clearly see the path forward, allowing us to focus on what’s best for our future, and the future of our children.

“I want to be clear: to forgive is an act of strength, not weakness,” Qualls asserted.

“We cannot continue forth as a healthy nation, thinking we are living in two separate Americas, and pitting groups of people against each other,” he emphasized. “It is unsustainable, and it is un-American.”

“We must come together with a renewed hope in our future,” he said, “by returning to trusted foundational values that can see us through a post-racial America, foundational values and behaviors that have weathered the test of time, which include personal responsibility, strong work ethic, pride in one’s nation, faith, two-parent families, and a first-rate education that allows anyone, and yes, I do mean anyone, to achieve their dreams.”

https://www.breitbart.com/education/2021/11/24/anti-woke-black-leader-post-racial-america-starts-with-two-parent-black-families/



Related

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/11/25/watch-university-students-learn-black-friday-has-nothing-to-do-with-race-so-no-longer-problematic/

VIDEO Thanksgiving on The War Room: Dr. Carol Swain Shares Her Incredible American Story and Johnny Cash Sings “A Thanksgiving Prayer”

By Jim Hoft November 25, 2021

Happy Thanksgiving!
The War Room ran a Thanksgiving Special earlier today to celebrate our great nation and our American family.

Dr. Carol Swain joined The War Room to offer this hopeful message: “The American Dream Is Not Dead!”

Dr. Swain told The War Room, “I have so much to be thankful for because I am a person that God clearly lifted up… I’ve enjoyed the success of America but the most important thing was my journey, my spiritual journey. I became a devout Christian believer and I can see the hand of God on my life.”

What a wonderful story!

The War Room played “A Thanksgiving Prayer” by the late great Johnny Cash to close out their morning show.
This was an excellent segment.

May we always be grateful for our many blessings on Thanksgiving and every day.

Thanksgiving Proclamation, 3 October 1789

Thanksgiving Proclamation

[New York, 3 October 1789]

By the President of the United States of America. a Proclamation.

Whereas it is the duty of all Nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey his will, to be grateful for his benefits, and humbly to implore his protection and favor—and whereas both Houses of Congress have by their joint Committee requested me “to recommend to the People of the United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many signal favors of Almighty God especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness.”

Now therefore I do recommend and assign Thursday the 26th day of November next to be devoted by the People of these States to the service of that great and glorious Being, who is the beneficent Author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be—That we may then all unite in rendering unto him our sincere and humble thanks—for his kind care and protection of the People of this Country previous to their becoming a Nation—for the signal and manifold mercies, and the favorable interpositions of his Providence which we experienced in the course and conclusion of the late war—for the great degree of tranquillity, union, and plenty, which we have since enjoyed—for the peaceable and rational manner, in which we have been enabled to establish constitutions of government for our safety and happiness, and particularly the national One now lately instituted—for the civil and religious liberty with which we are blessed; and the means we have of acquiring and diffusing useful knowledge; and in general for all the great and various favors which he hath been pleased to confer upon us.

and also that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations and beseech him to pardon our national and other transgressions—to enable us all, whether in public or private stations, to perform our several and relative duties properly and punctually—to render our national government a blessing to all the people, by constantly being a Government of wise, just, and constitutional laws, discreetly and faithfully executed and obeyed—to protect and guide all Sovereigns and Nations (especially such as have shewn kindness unto us) and to bless them with good government, peace, and concord—To promote the knowledge and practice of true religion and virtue, and the encrease of science among them and us—and generally to grant unto all Mankind such a degree of temporal prosperity as he alone knows to be best.

Given under my hand at the City of New-York the third day of October in the year of our Lord 1789.

Go: Washington

DS, CStbK; DS, DLC:GW; copy, sold by Christie, Manson, & Woods, International, 21 Oct. 1977. The proclamation was also printed as a broadside. Copies of the broadside are at Harvard University, Yale University, and the Pierpont Morgan Library. Other copies are owned (1992) by Marshall B. Coyne, Washington, D.C., and Ralph Geoffrey Newman, Inc., Chicago.

For background to this document, see Circular Letter to the Governors of the States, 3 Oct. 1789, n.1.

https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/05-04-02-0091


The Power of Thanksgiving

Kay Camenisch

It’s that season again, when we’re reminded to be thankful — and to express thankfulness. God has told us,

“In everything give thanks; for this is God’s will for you in Christ Jesus.” 1 Thessalonians 5:18 (NASB)

Even though we know it’s God’s will, for most of us, a reminder is a good thing, because in the midst of busyness and challenges of life, we often forget to be grateful for our many blessings.

I always think of a particular incident when I think of giving thanks. Many years ago, our friend Paul noticed that his young daughter Susannah had a ritual with her bedtime prayers. She always prayed, “God, bless Mommy, and Daddy, and …” She went down her list, asking God for her all her wants.

At prayer time one night, he said, “Susannah, you have a lot to be thankful for. I’d like you to start your prayers with thanksgiving.” Susannah agreed, but Paul left on a trip the next morning and wasn’t able to reinforce his instruction.

When he returned, her prayers had not changed. He said, “Susannah, what did I ask you to do when you pray?”

She hesitated before answering. “Uhhh. Start my prayers with Halloween?”

She remembered the request—but didn’t understand what thanksgiving was and got mixed up with which holiday he had said.

Unlike Susannah, I understand what it means to give thanks and that it’s good to express appreciation, but I often get so busy that I don’t take note of what I’m grateful for, much less express it to others. I’ve resolved to do better after recently experiencing the blessing of being on the receiving end.

My husband is a pastor of a church of amazing people who regularly communicate their thanks. It makes it a joy to be part of them. However, we were recently showered with love and many expressions of appreciation. I must admit, it felt good. It deepened our love and our commitment to give more of ourselves. It also made me want to be more faithful in expressing my thanks.

But that was just the beginning of the day. After church and the dinner that followed, our home filled with out-of-town family who came to celebrate Dad’s 89th birthday. We visited, celebrated, and enjoyed being together. After the meal, while still around the table, I was once again struck with what an impact it makes to speak words of appreciation.

Robert’s youngest brother said, “Dad, at our house, we have a tradition that we do on birthdays, and we’d like to do it now.” He went on to explain that we wanted to each share something with Dad that we appreciated about him, starting with the youngest and moving up.

Seven-year-old Elena went first, and one at a time, each of ten people shared something they were grateful for, something Dad had done that had blessed his or her life. Most shared two or three things that had made an impact — and all sounded sincere.

At least once, Dad’s eyes filled with tears. Others were touched too. It was a precious time and a much bigger blessing than the simple gifts given earlier.

It was also powerful. Dad wasn’t the only one blessed. We all left the table encouraged, strengthened, and closer to one another because of words of gratefulness. All we did was say thanks — but we don’t make a point to do that often enough. I basked in the blessing and power of the time around the table for several days.

I wish we had practiced that tradition in our home as our children were growing up. In fact, I’m wondering how to stimulate more giving of thanks in other settings — of open, sincere, thoughtful expressions of appreciation. If you have ideas, I’m interested.

However, after some thought, I’ve decided that the best place to begin is with myself. I might not impact the whole community, but I could encourage some.

Meanwhile, I hope your Thanksgiving is blessed with gratefulness—and with thanksgiving.

Copyright © Kay Camenisch. Used by permission.

Can God change your life?

God has made it possible for you to know Him and experience an amazing change in your own life. Discover how you can find peace with God. You can also send us your prayer requests.

https://www1.cbn.com/devotions/the-power-of-thanksgiving